One of U47 torpedo's that missed the Royal oak was found on the sea bed of Scapa flow in 2016

I know Drachinifel had a family member that died on Royal Oak. Sad stuff. My great grandpa served on an aircraft carrier in the Guadalcanal campaign, here’s to hoping it was Enterprise.

@manveerparmar6570

6 ай бұрын

Did he say what his name was?

@manveerparmar6570

6 ай бұрын

From Royal Oak?

@d.olivergutierrez8690

6 ай бұрын

@@manveerparmar6570his great uncle I think that’s what he said.

@TrickiVicBB71

6 ай бұрын

​@@d.olivergutierrez8690 yep, a great uncle died on board this ship

@jusportel

6 ай бұрын

Grandma had a relative aboard Royal Oak, as well, and lost three cousins on HMS Hood. 😢

Fun fact, I have a model of HMS Royal Oak in my bedroom alongside another model of the soviet Battleship Archangelsk. The Scappa Flow raid is one of the most embarrassing chapters of the second world war for the British Royal Navy, but they are lucky it was not much worse. To think what might have happened if U-47 had arrived when Scappa Flow was crammed with shipping, as it often was throughout the war. I'm glad to hear that her wreck is being treated as hallowed ground, and that she is left to rest in peace. She still carries the bodies of over two thirds of her crew, and for a ship so proud as to be a survivor of Jutland...I think she, alongside her crew, deserve a quiet sanctuary. Always a pleasure to watch these, and to learn about more maritime history! Keep it up!

@HACM-mk3qx

6 ай бұрын

Any illegal salvagers won't get to 1rst base without being arrested.

I witnessed the oil slick from the Royal Oak on the surface of Scapa Flow in 1993 while decending on a commercial flight into Kirkwall airport. It was leaking like the Arizona. I knew nothing about the source of the slick until later when visiting souvenir shops in Stromness nearby. Gunther Prien is a big name in the Orkney Islands as is the naval history of Scapa Flow.

14 years ago I saw her wreck, up close, with my own eyes. I was in my late uncle's boat (a magnificent creation using the hull of a German navy pinnace, the engine from a White steam car, a home made boiler and a condenser made from salvaged bits of HMS Vanguard). We sailed out over the top of the wreck (which is only a few feet below the surface at low tide) and drifted along her length, looking out over the sides of the boat. It took a few moments to focus through our own reflections, but once it came in to focus it was unmistakable. There, just below us was a massive warship, lying almost upside down. As we drifted down her, I could clearly make out her bilge keel, her secondary armament and a few holes in her with her ribs/frames sticking out. It was a haunting experience that I will never forget.

@jenniferbowen839

6 ай бұрын

Very sad indeed

@jenniferbowen839

6 ай бұрын

So many precious lives

Always good to see a storied warship being shown as more than just "that ship that blew up during this event."

One wonders at times what would have been if the Royal Navy had leapt on the huge potential of the clauses in the naval treaties that placed few to no limits on utility ships under 2,000 tons. The Royal Navy could have had hundreds of sloops, corvettes, and other small ships optimized for dominance of the waters around Britain, convoy escort over the seas, and more, making it impossible for a fleet like the Kriegsmarine to function without the need for a huge number of big British warships immediately on hand. For example, a class of fast minelayers, under 600 tons, could have been rushing to drop defense or offensive minefields within hours of war being declared. A huge fleet of big 2,000-ton convoy escorts running slow on cheap engines could have been ready to immediately begin convoying anywhere in the world, releasing destroyers and other fast warships from the task. A massive fleet of fast 600-ton AWS hunters could have been ready to immediately lockdown critical regions. A fleet of special picket boats, basically floating radar/radio sets that could linger for days and weeks on station, networking with other picket boats to make an impenetrable web of detectors to prevent lone raiders, both submarine and surface, from going far before being seen. Thousands of sailors could be cheaply trained and quickly returned to service on these simple but capable ships.

@ThePalaeontologist

6 ай бұрын

This is an astute observation, and I would also add that it would call into keen question, the dubious 'need' for things like the incredibly one-sided Destroyers-For-Bases scheme which was little more than Britain being played for a fool in 1940 with a large portion of the 50 old WWI Caldwells, Clemsons and Wickes, not even arriving in Britain until after May 1941. One of the worst deals ever and a hint at things to come. Now, to the credit of the Royal Navy, with hundreds of destroyers in operation all told, as thins picked up (the Town-class; the repurposed trio of former US Navy destroyer classes aforementioned here, which were in poor condition at transfer and somewhat insulting), they still had bigger fish to fry than quibbling over a stopgap measure in 1940. But that's just the point; it lead to 99 year leases on formerly British naval bases and it was hardly a fair deal for some rusty old destroyers from WWI. It is curious, your concept, because it would certainly cast doubt on the need for the Destroyers-For-Bases, because there'd be a lot more ships of a smaller stature which could challenge the Germans more capably in that size and weight class so to speak. No need for blatant rip-off deals in desperation when we had no other choice. Alas.

@michaelmcnally2331

6 ай бұрын

@@ThePalaeontologistthe deal was mainly for political purposes rather then any actual real gains for UK.

@PercyPruneMHDOIFandBars

6 ай бұрын

The basic problem is though, the main task of the RN was trade protection throughout the empire. Needing ships with a huge range, hence the preponderance of cruisers. These ships were being built right up to the end of WW1, it would be false economy to scrap them well within their expected lifetime. Clearly mistakes were made, but without the large number of capital ships the RN had, the blockade and destruction of German surface raiders, (some of the most powerful vessels afloat at the time) would have been impossible. Add to that, the fact that the Kreigsmarine were starting virtually from scratch after the scuttle of the Grand Fleet in 1919 and Germany clearly had an advantage in modern ships.

@genericpersonx333

6 ай бұрын

No one is talking about scrapping bigger ships to make smaller ships, but rather just making the smaller ships to allow the bigger ships to be focused on what bigger ships can do better. Bear in mind, the Washington and London treaties had no limits on ships under 600 tons (make all you want with whatever will fit) and ships up to 2,000 tons could be built in limitless numbers provided they met a few modest capability restrictions. The Royal Navy would build a handful of such ships before the war precisely to ease the burden on the bigger warships, and once war came, they would make hundreds of them. However, because they only had the handful, it would be months and even years where the destroyers, cruisers, and battleships were doing all the work everywhere when a simple sloop would have arguably done better if it had been available. @@PercyPruneMHDOIFandBars

I'm ex Royal Navy and in 1987 we were heading up to norway and we stopped over the war grave that is HMS ROYAL OAK and had a service and wreath into the water from the flight deck of my ship HMS INTREPID. It was a very moving ceremony as I was only a17 years old junior seaman gunner.

Yeah. I remember a video on the _Arizona_ which like _Royal Oak_ had had a very long career before her sinking, also in port. There was mention of all the different sports teams that the Battleship had and how they had fared in contests with other ships in the Fleet's Sports Leagues. All these ships were miniature cities with hundreds of crewmen aboard - all of them - with their own lives - so many of which would be lost with the ship. As with _Barham_ these ships are mostly remembered for their end - rather than their long careers and the lives of the crewmen who had served on them. .

@jessnalulila5709

2 ай бұрын

With Barham it's more because we can see the video of the disaster

I had Uncles who fought in the ETO and PTO. They came back, Thanks be to God. For those who didn't Thank you for your sacrifice. Rest Easy Soldiers your duty is done. For the Sailors Fair winds and following seas

The Rs were afterthought battleships, and arguably never should have been built. The Royal Navy would have ultimately been far better served by building 3 more Queen Elizabeths, or a few more Renowns or Hoods.

@George_M_

6 ай бұрын

Seriously. Imagine two more Hoods (I suspect even 2 instead of 5 R class would be too expensive). A proper fast battlecruiser unit.

@princessofthecape2078

6 ай бұрын

@@George_M_ Hood didn't really have any specific faults - she was just misused. Putting her up against a modern, fast battleship just wasn't going to work out - while on paper, she and Prince of Wales were more than a match for Bismarck and Prinz Eugen, the reality was that Hood was a damage sponge, and PoW wasn't ready for action. If the admiralty hadn't been so panicked about immediately meeting Bismarck in battle, they could have bided their time and brought appropriate force to bear.

@Jpdt19

6 ай бұрын

I think you do them a discredit and look too much with hindsight. The QEs were very much outside the norm and ENORMOUSLY expensive compared to what had come. The RN was in a building race with the Germans and planned to out do them. The Iron Dukes with already superior to most of the German battle line and the QEs blew that out the water. The revenges were cheaper and remember the RN planned to build 8. Two entire battle squadrons. Furthermore they did try to make them 23 knot ships, not the 21 they ended. They served credibly into the early 30s, up to which point other than being a bit slower they were comparable with what they were in theory up against other than some outliers. It's only in the 30s that they really start to show their age and inability to be upgraded. But having served on the whole 25 years a warship is normally designed to serve, that's not unexpected. They did also remain credible second line battleships for convoy defence etc in WW2. Just the same way the older us dreadnaughts did.

@AnonNomad

6 ай бұрын

@@Jpdt19 This, the Italians actually designed something similar (some would argue superior) in the Francesco Caracciolo-class but the cost was eye watering to the Regia Marina. The QE's really were the Navy breaking the bank for the best.

@hellhound47bravo3

6 ай бұрын

Curious, were these ships that hard to upgrade, or just not good investments given their speed? I have heard comments about these ships limitations, but never a detailed explanation.@@Jpdt19

A tragic end to a ship that never got a chance to do much by way of action. The loss of life is staggering. RIP to all who perished aboard her.

Warships...iron soldiers with brave men. Salute! 🌹⚓

Her speed was typical of battleships of her era. Very few battleships were faster, including the Queen Elizabeth class. That said yes, battlecruisers were faster, as they were designed to be from the start of the concept. Good to also remember that the R class would have been replaced by the KGVs if the war had not happened and the navel treaties are been continued.

Interesting video. Lots of good information. Thanks !

You should do one on the USS Nevada. The ship that refused to sink!

Mad how Scapa Flow wasn't turned into a fortress after WW1.

I remember an interview with a former 19 year old crew member who said, she wasn’t a happy ship, not a ship you were keen on being posted on. He said „Roll on the Nelson, the Rodney or Hood, this one funnel steam ship is no having good.“

@gayprepperz6862

6 ай бұрын

I have heard ( I think from Drachinifil ), that the moral on that ship really sucked, due in main part because of the attitude of the officers.

17:55 Scuttles!!! Not portholes!

Wonder why she wasn't salvaged with the RN short of ships?

@Jpdt19

6 ай бұрын

She was upside down, largely obselete and they were in a war. The KGVs were also steadily coming into service.

@genreynolds6685

6 ай бұрын

USS Oklahoma wasn’t salvaged either, also capsized. Tremendous damage.

Nice video. I think at the end re the bodies in the war grave the right word is “interred”, (not “interned.”). Thanks.

always wondered why the Nazi's did not build aircraft carriers for WW2 action..have not found much literature at all about this..feel it would have made a huge impact in naval warfare..

@BHuang92

6 ай бұрын

Germany never had any experience with aircraft carriers and their doctrine (if they had any) called for reconnaissance and self sufficient in commerce raiding by itself. Their plan and execution was hilariously flawed! They built one, the Graf Zeppelin which was never completed and if so, would've not made a difference aside of being a waste of resources.

@AptMantis2278

6 ай бұрын

@@BHuang92and the reason it was never completed was because the appropriate resources were being used elsewhere (or could never be sourced like aircraft for the carrier)

@marckyle5895

6 ай бұрын

@@downunderrob The Bf-109 would have rivaled the Buffalo for gear collapses landing on a carrier deck. Can you imagine that spindly gear taking a hard landing? They would have been better off with a navalised FW-190. Goering & the corrupt RLM would have 'made sure' the navalised fighter was the 109, gear and all.

@flag5enemyinsight397

6 ай бұрын

Inter-service rivalry hamstrung the ability to launch a functioning German aircraft carrier.

@Brumbieman

6 ай бұрын

They built one, never finished it, but had plans for at least 4. The design was rubbish though, the only one that laid down was the Graf Zeppelin and could have only held 40 aircraft due to it's hybrid carrier/cruiser design. It was intended to carry 109's and Stukas, but the 109 would obviously have been a disaster as a carrier option. The FW190 was literally perfect, as it could carry torpedoes, was a good diver bomber, could be loaded up with rockets etc or just be used as a fighter so they wouldn't have needed any other type on board. The main reason, is the same as WW1 - even if they sent it out, it had to get past England before it would be able to do anything and would have met the same fate as the Bismarck unless it went out with a supporting fleet, and even then the whole fleet would have been hunted down. Germany just doesn't have the geography on their side to be able to build a big Navy and actually use it, if England doesn't want them to.

Could you imagine how everyone felt when the news of her sinking in the uk felt all the national pride plus all the young men that died my grandad was in the army at the time I was a babe in arms when he died

Was that HMS Victory in the background from 8:45-9:00?

I had the privilege to dive the Scapa Flow wrecks back in 2008. Unfortunately Royal Oak was and still is off limits 😭

Very sad, so many precious lives lost,

💚💙👍👍👏👏

Wasn't this sinking, the end for boys serving on naval ships!

@robaskham9145

3 ай бұрын

It was indeed. My Grandad was one of them, and fortunately for me one of the few with that rank who survived.