Contains footage of the plane my father was the armourer for, the F4U Corsair with British markings, with the fleet air arm! He also worked with the Fairy Swordfish both as an apprentice tool maker at Blackburn Aircraft and in the navy!

@PBFSENSOR

4 жыл бұрын

My father was the chief electrical inspector for the Chance Vought Corsair. He used to bring me to the factory a lot. I saw hundreds of Corsairs come out the factory door and fly out over the Sound. The Corsairs bound for England all had their tailfins painted with the names of the workers` children.

The Swordfish was kept around because the one role where you don't really want a speedy airplane is going after submarines. You want a slow steady platform to look down from to spot the sub from the air (where the index of refraction doesn't hide the sub like it does when looking at the water surface at a shallow angle). Hunting subs is mostly about trying to find the damn things.

Great video! You mostly hear about the RAF battles but the Fleet Air Arm did very well also!

The British have always had great pilots and a forward-thinking process to naval air warfare. It's a shame modern documentaries cannot match these older ones, despite some minor technical deficiencies.

Love these old doco's pity about the sound dropping out

2 things spring to mind : the swordfish had a slower minimum speed so trying to shoot one in a "modern" fighter was very hard as you have to overtake at high speed, you cannot match it. secondly, being somewhat slower you could fly them a lot lower without crashing into the sea so frequently, including i believe on more than one occasion, below the large ships flak shield :)

The Royal Navy operated excellent aircraft, Sea Hurricane, Seafire, Fulmar, Firefly, and the Swordfish- it sunk the Italian fleet and stopped the Bismark

@brgilbert2

4 жыл бұрын

[fdsdh 1] You know, your statement is so bs. Sorry, but your wrong. I would not consider those planes you name to be adequate, especially the Swordfish a slow bi-plane against a battleship with barely enough anti-aircraft guns and with NO support ships to help and I am including an antiquated Italian Navy with the German Navy. So ,where is my proof. The Admiralty sent the Prince of Wales ( you know, Hood and Prince of Wales and Bismark fame) and some support ships to the Pacific and ran into a modern navy, aircraft carriers and modern planes and was crushed. If you change your statement to alright air power for fighting on the high seas in the European theater then I would agree with you. Right now I am reading about the "unknown British fleet" which I was unaware of with modern planes though those planes were American like the F4u Corsair.

I like the older video more than the History Channel’s shallow stuff with excessive use of computer fake graphics

flying machines....love it...

The Admirals liked battleships Another problem was small production runs. The main fighter builders had all they could manage designing & building for the RAF and the RAF never talked to the navy about anything and certainly not aircraft. The other big companies specialised in building bombers or transports so the few planes the navy wanted designed by men thought as long as it flew it was OK. The aircraft themselves were almost hand-built in back sheds.

The Royal Navy used Corsair F4 off carriers before the US Navy.

@iboarshock7059

8 жыл бұрын

+barbarybar Yep, the Brits were the ones who figured out the trick to landing those long-nosed beasties on a little tiny flight deck when you can't see what's in front of you. It was only after they showed the USN how it's done that the Corsair could be carrier qualified.

@iboarshock7059

8 жыл бұрын

+Said Kakese Dibinga As I recall the Royal Navy used them from around the beginning of 1944 till the end of the war with Japan. Then, being lend-lease equipment, the British had to either pay for them or return them to the US. The Brits didn't want to pay, but the US already had far too many aircraft for the post-war and wasn't about to ship them back, so RN Corsairs ended up being dumped overboard somewhere off Australia.

@pnartg

6 жыл бұрын

The RN received their first Corsairs in November of 1943 and they entered combat in early 1944. So I wouldn't call that "early" WW2.

@yeoldegrumpy-git1483

6 жыл бұрын

As it was nearly 1942 ( December 7 1941 ) that the USA got into ww2 it may well be "early" for them

my great granddad used to be in the air arm and also his wife's brother was in the air force and got caught by the germans and was sent to the war camp there as prisoner

@geofftb100

5 жыл бұрын

These anti-Americancomments are ridiculous since the US were part of the Allies who defeated the Axis-and could we use them!

@ingeposch8091

4 жыл бұрын

@@geofftb100 forgot your meds, did you?

yes pilot, radio operator and gunner

I can imagine all lives lost at sea during these times

Hi, I'm looking for the original license for this to use within a piece of A/V work. Please can you let me know where you found it. Many thanks.

@PuzzlingEvidenceTV : OK....but it seems I've misspelled Fairey. Your video has a lot of skips in the sound track, however. Guess that's par for the course with old films.

@learnabt6911

7 жыл бұрын

hey

8. Which ties in with 7, Burma was considered important by the Japanese Army. The U.S. and not even the UK considered it an important theater. Tactically, it might be awesome, but it didn't really help end the war. It was Australian and U.S. Marines. using whatever the European theater (which was--Even to the U.S.!--the primary focus) didn't get. The Pacific got the scraps and the U.S., didn't abandon the theater (unlike the RN after the IJN raid on Ceylon) (Again more to follow =) )

I guess those hurricanes that formed part of the carrier groups in mid WW2 were invisible to you XD

Butchuk2007..The non armoured flight deck was a trade off..The USN Carriers were able to carry more planes and had more "headroom" on the Hanger deck..The RN carriers had less head room and could not carry as many planes as the USN carriers. that was a consession, not an oversight...

@zzirSnipzz1

3 жыл бұрын

Well they proved their worth never lost an armoured carrier and they took serious punishmment illustrious especially

There were a lot of US-built Corsairs in the video. How many did the British navy use?

@theoneinthebackground4209

6 жыл бұрын

dunbar9finger Many aircraft the Royal Navy used were American, because the carriers belonged to the RAF and they neglected the carriers and carrier aircraft, and in early WW2 the focus was the Battle of Britain so the RN couldn’t get new advanced planes so they need to use American planes until they could build their own.

@williamtraynor-kean7214

2 жыл бұрын

The USN would not operate Corsairs due to the number of accidents on landing due to the problems with forward visibility. The FAA solved this problem using a curved approach. and the problem was solved.

What they "Forgot" to mention is that if the Captain of the Ark Royal had followed proper anti submarine practices that the Ark Royal would most likely be a Royal Navy meusem somewhere today instead of a home for wayward fish and barnacles on the seafloor somewhere. The Captain of the Ark Royal was flagrantly violating normal Anti sub procedures when it was hit, which also explains why she took 3 solid hits when most times the U Boat Commanders found it difficult to achieve a single initial Torpedo hit against slow frieghters that are following proper ASW rules at the time. The Captain of Ark Royal was in fact so flagrantly violating proper Anti Submarine rules in waters known to have hostile submarines in operation that it was almost as if he was asking to be attacked or perhaps, with a steady string of nothing but sucess since the war began, maybe it was a case of over inflated egos that led the Ark Royals Officers and Captain mistakenly believe that they were somehow immune to being successfully attacked and serious damage. After all they went through many determined arieal attacks and came through them all with barely a single scratch. So one can almost see where the Captain would be very tempted to forego the tedious, time consumeing and seemingly pointless anti submarine rig-ah-ma-roll, most especially when heading for port after tireing and stressful combat patrols at sea. The temptation to simply head for port at the quickest pace the battle group and all her escorts would allow would be strong but the Captain of all people is supposed to have the iron discpline required to make those unpopular calls. I believe the Captain of the Ark Royal should have been immediatly relieved of command and subject to court martial for Gross Derliction of Duty resulting in Loss of His Command and Loss of Life. The exact same charges should have been leveled against Admiral Bull Halsey when during the invasion of the Phillipines instead of protecting the imvasion beacheads, supplying proper air support to the imvasions ground forces in the critical opening hours, and basic protection of the invasion fleet itself, the as yet unloaded troop ships, supply, ships support ect that were all basically defensless without Halseys ships of his battlegroups. Instead Halsey fell for a japanese deception and trap and went chaseing off pell mell after a couple japanese aircraft carriers void of any aircraft. This pulled him well away from the imvasion area while two huge japanese battle groups imcludeing the two largest battleships everput to sea in history the Yammato and her sister ship, split in two arms to come to destroy the now helpless invasion fleet. One arm was turned back by american battleships but the other faced only the tiny force of Task force Taffy 3. That comprised of a couple of jeep carriers with wildcat fighters supplied with only land ordinance useless to attack ships with and three destroyer escorts. In an amazing action that was perhaps the bravest and most noble of the war the DEs actually crossed the T of the huge battleships barreling down on them and attacked with all they had. The tiny DEs managed to blow the bow off a heavy cruiser and cause much cconfusion amoung the Japanese. The Japanese commander believeing Amerivan main force battleships must be just behind the little ships he thought was their screen, and not wanting to be caught in the narrow waters between the islands allowing the battleships to cross their T with meaning the decision was made to reverse and withdraw where the Yammato and others were destroyed by air a few days later. That the tiny force was able to stand with and turn the Japanese forces and save the entire invasion was one of the most amazing stories of the war, although most of Taffy 3 was destroyed they will actually live forever. The story was npt told at the time, I think iintentionally supressed to cover Halseys derliction of duty where if it became widely known would have forced some type of official action and in wartime governments are very reluctant to arrest people, especially flagg officers, they built up as heros previously, so nothing was done not even a verbal reprimand. I think its a travesty in both cases. Montgomery himself was borderline when even though there was solid credible intel from multiple sources that two crack SS Panzer divisions had moved into the area he still launched Market Garden knowing full well the only chance for success was the original intel saying only the very old and very young with barely any formal training of the volks army, the equivilent of the home guard at wars start in england with no armor of any signifigance and even then it might be a close thing. With front line well trained and equiped troops of the whermacht, not to even mention elite SS Panzer Divisons all combat hardened Market Garden stood no chance at all being forced to advance up a single narrow road in a very short period of time--when it took Montgomery weeks to capture his first hours invasion objective. Montgomery felt that stopping pattons advances through france with him grabbing headlines throughout the world everyday with hardly ever a mention of montgomery--except how he was whineing to eisenhower demanding he be put in ccommand of all ground forces--and the Glory that the success of it would have given him was worth gambling the lives of the forces involved even if it was now only a longshot slight hope. And that proves more than all his previous overcaution cost in time and lives how truely Average Montgomery actually was. He lucked out that England desperatly needed both good news and a hero after the string of terribly shocking blows of corregidor and other huge losses. Montgomery lucked into stepping into the Africa command directly after it was discovered Rommel was getting all the British battle plans via the broken American embassy codes as the American military attache attached to the british forces was sending them back to washington. This allowed Rommel all his uncanny victories and nickname as desert fox. Montgomery stepped into the command didnt change anything of the planning and because Rommel now was in the dark without advance knowledge of the british plans he started loosing as he would have if montgomery wasnt there. The difference was that in his caution Montgomery didnt pursue Rommel as he retreated with his tired broken down forces critically low on gas and ammo and allowed them to be mostly evacuated to sicily then italy where refreshed resupplied and rested they killed many more allied troops. The General Montgomery replaced being more aggressive most likely would have pursued rommels broken force and either forced their surrender or completely destroyed it instead of letting the bulk escape. Montgomery was always terribly overcautious. If he would have been put in command of all allied troops we would still be fighting in Africa today. Patton always forced Montgomery into action or he knew patton not Montgomery would get the credit headlines and glory like he did in Sicily even though Montgomery basically ordered him not to beat him into messiniah which he did anyway. Montgomery always seemed to end up 2nd best to patton and there was good reason for this. Patton really was 4 times the General Montgomery ever would be and Montgomery knew it so hated Patton all the more.

@dboulding

4 жыл бұрын

"So one can almost see where the Captain would be very tempted to forego the tedious, time consumeing and seemingly pointless anti submarine rig-ah-ma-roll, most especially when heading for port after tireing and stressful combat patrols at sea" Not so. My father was up in the air at that time in 812NAS doing exactly that, anti-submarine patrols.

@brgilbert2

4 жыл бұрын

[J. Taylor] Enjoyed your remarks greatly, especially concerning Montgomery. I am reminded about U.S. failures by our generals when we first joined the fight in North Africa, most notably by Eisenhower. But as many articles I have read, Eisenhower acknowledged those mistakes and is quoted "yes but we learned fast". In defense of Halsey you don't remove someone as liked and well respected by all, including those who served under him for an aggressive miscalculation. And he was actually reprimanded by Nimitz, well maybe not officially but when Nimitz was informed of the situation fired off a cable demanding "WHERE IS MY NAVY"?

Hmmmm. Ark Royal was never the "only carrier in the world". I'm pretty sure that 6 Japanese and 5 American carriers were already afloat.

@jamesbridge6408

5 жыл бұрын

pete sampson Not in 1939, sir.

@Solidboat123

4 жыл бұрын

What he actually said was "first-line fleet carrier"

@brgilbert2

4 жыл бұрын

@@jamesbridge6408 Oh please! You are just a little mistaken. The Lexington cv2 and Saratoga cv3 entered service in 1928 and 1925 respectively. First conceived as "battle cruisers", those two ships were redesigned after the Washington Treaty of 1922. What is important about that treaty is, aircraft carriers were NOT considered as "capital" ships, that is of an offensive nature. Because of that the U.S. Navy ended up with two large and very fast ships, almost 20 knots faster than the first U.S.N. carrier, the Langly. In fact, the Lexington and Saratoga were slightly bigger than the later carriers built in the late 30's. And yes, the Lexington and Saratoga were first line ships, carriers with sleek hulls designed for speed.

@zzirSnipzz1

3 жыл бұрын

@@brgilbert2 Ark Royal wasnt a converted carrier it was built as a pacific carrier, Lexy and sara were battlecruiser hulls

In response to your reference to how many bombs the USAAF/RAF dropped on Germany. What you fail to mention, is that the RAF bombed at night, with less opposition than the USAAF's daylight raids. (Yes, it's true, the Lancaster and Hallifax both had a larger bomb load than the B-17 and B-24s) So, more overall bombs dropped, and less risk with their missions. (more to follow)

@williamtraynor-kean7214

2 жыл бұрын

The B17 flown by the USAAF had more gun armament and from 1944 flew with fighter escorts. RAF Bomber Command had the highest casualty rate of any allied service. However, both the RAF and the USAAF were crewed by exceedingly brave men and I find debates as to who was the best distasteful to their memory.

Money? But despite negative votes you are right.RN flyers were bad at specifying aircraft & bought planes built like battleships- strong but they did not fly very fast or well. The Seafire flew OK but had a narrow undercarriage that was too weak for carrier work. The Swordfsh was reliable & liked but the rest were rubbish & the Barracuda was actually dangerous. After 3 years of war one of their best officers managed to get them some good aircraft - US Hellcats, Avengers and eventually Corsairs.

well i guess well never know what the axis were thinking ;)

More facts: 5. UK dominated overall strategy for the first few years after the U.S. entered the war. However, by 1944, it was quite clear that the U.S. had control of the plans to defeat Germany, Italy, and then Japan. 6. War Plan- Red (which was the plan the U.S. would have followed had we found ourselves in a war against England and her empire) was a part of a larger group of war plans, called Rainbow. (Yes, the U.S. has fought England before, so it's not an impossibility) (More to follow)

@DS-xp4jb

7 жыл бұрын

Fizwalker England dominated overall strategy. Respectfully, are you aware that England complained bitterly about American investment in the Pacific? They wanted us to protect English empire. FDR told them he wasn't interested in the gamesmanship Churchill was peddling.

@Fizwalker

7 жыл бұрын

Honestly, defeating Germany first was the right decision, but by mid to late 1943, the U.S. was becoming more dominant in deciding how to go about doing that. It was more at U.S. insistence that Normandy was invaded in '44-- Churchill was more in favor of invading France near Marseilles, and he did eventually get that.

@williamtraynor-kean7214

2 жыл бұрын

@@Fizwalker Could you cite your source for Churchill wishing to invade France through the south, you would not make a Lance Corporal in the Logistics Corps to see that would not work.

@Fizwalker

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamtraynor-kean7214 Yeah, going to be hot minute. I need to look it up again.

From little acorns mighty oaks grow!

Great footage of the Vickers Vincent @ 9.16!!...(er NO abuse if I am wrong! please!)

Not sure I like the use of the footage of the HMS Barham blowing up at the start of the film. Little disrespectful of the Braham's dead.

@lipsee100

4 жыл бұрын

@John Cameron does,nt make it right though!!

@donaldcunningham2386

2 жыл бұрын

I agree. How did the producer imagine it was appropriate???

@Peorhum

2 жыл бұрын

@@donaldcunningham2386 I think the idea was, they are trying to show air power at sea killed the battleship...so they showed a battleship being sunk by a submarine...doesn't work for me

According to Kenneth Munson, the Royal Navy had 1,977. The RNZAF took 425. Interestingly, the USN didn't think the Corsair could operate from carriers and didn't operate them from ships until something like a year after the FAA started (if you look at the British carrier fighters of the period, you can see why the FAA didn't turn its nose up). The last air VC awarded in WWII was to Lt. Robert Gray, a Canadian FAA pilot serving in HMS Formidable in August 1945.

I am pretty sure Fjord shipping attacks at 14:50 were a Mosquito raid, not launched from an aircraft carrier

@sootycakes

4 жыл бұрын

Your right

@ingeposch8091

4 жыл бұрын

there were numerous air attacks on the fjords during ww2, made by all sorts of airplanes... even Wellingtons and Lancasters were used in bombing raids on German ships in the fjords.

There was a war plan to fight Mexico (War Plan Green). War Plan Black was a plan to beat Germany and War Plan Orange was the starting point for how the U.S. fought Japan. 7. While it might be true that the Brit 14th Army handed the Japanese Army their biggest defeat, it's also true that the IJA handed the Brits an equally large defeat, Singapore 1942 when 80k Brit soldiers surrendered to 36k Japanese troops. (More to follow)

@Ubique2927

7 жыл бұрын

Fizwalker .. One fucking moron of a commander surrendered to the Japanese at Singapore!

@Fizwalker

7 жыл бұрын

Agreed.

@wyominghorseman9172

5 жыл бұрын

@William Gruff 70,000 Philippine, and 11,000 Americans. America planned to give the Philippines sovereignty in 1946. America had not upgraded the Philippine defenses since 1924.

The Germans couldn't even invade England by sea, they had no carriers and at best two battleships, but good ones. So how the heck could they sail way past England and invade America? At the end of WW ll, the US had 20 new battleships & 100 carriers., We could have wiped the who RN out in one battle

9. Politics. You're upset that the U.S. didn't join in when the Brits did in 1939. What you've failed to consider is the following. that as of 12 Oct 1940, the U.S. was in an undeclared (primarily naval) war with Germany. It's called the Hemispheric Defense. Unlike today, getting a declaration of war must go through Congress, otherwise the President has specific limitations on how long he can conduct military operations (Yes, that has implications for modern conflicts) (Even more to follow...)

Does anyone have any idea about the origin of this film? I'm try to locate the original copyright holders...

@distance5000

10 жыл бұрын

This video was most likely made by a governmental body of the UK, which made it fall into the category of "Crown Copyright". Crown copyright lasts for 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which it was published. Therefore, if the film was published in 1940, its copyright expired at the end of the calendar year 1990.

@distance5000

10 жыл бұрын

If this film was made by or under the direction or control of the House of Commons or the House of Lords, then its copyright lasted until 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was made. In either cases this film should have already entered the public domain.

@MkVII

9 жыл бұрын

'Sea War' was a documentary made by the old Southern Television network in 1960; it was narrated by Admiral Foster-Brown with a series of slightly stilted introductions by the then First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Caspar John. It was based on the format made successful by the NBC series 'Victory At Sea', even the music sounded similar. It was rerun on British TV about 1985. The footage of Barham was not shown until after the war, when Pathé showed for the first time.

@craigmacintosh6230

5 жыл бұрын

If you look you may see what you are looking for at the beginning of the film........

@JBC814 We Win!

Why did he say the Ark Royal was "the only first line fleet carrier in the world" at the outbreak of WW2? The US Navy's Yorktown class carriers (Yorktown and Enterprise) were operational at that time and were very similar in size, capability, and complement to the Ark Royal. ... ...or does he just mean from the British perspective? Like the old British joke, "Fog in Channel, Europe cut off."

@neilhellens8956

5 жыл бұрын

He said First line Aircraft Carrier.As in Line of Battle..She had armoured decks.She was supposed to be able to go into Battle with and against Battleships.American and Japanese Carriers had wooden decks.

@brgilbert2

4 жыл бұрын

@@neilhellens8956 Ah! I see but U.S. carriers never had armor plated flight decks that I know of.

apparently US absorbed most of the commonwealth forces so when u look at the pacific it always says US but the thing is look deeper and it is compose of many task forces.. also churchil thinks brit presense in the pacific is unwelcome so they concentrated in burma and malaya. added note apparently the pacific battle is exlusively american

@DS-xp4jb

7 жыл бұрын

Mini Cooper This was tacit recognition of the Open Door Policy of the United States. Which England stood opposed to for decades.

@Fizwalker

7 жыл бұрын

In regards to British presence in the Pacific, it was true to a degree. I doubt the average joe in theater would have objected, but Admiral King was very much opposed to having the Brits involved-- It's why the RN presence in 1945 was limited to raids against Borneo and other targets near Malaya. King never forgave the Brits for refusing to help just before Midway. From what I read, King was an incredibly proud man and I think he was ashamed to have to ask for the help. He never forgave Churchill for refusing to help in time of need. Apparently Churchill regretted that decision and how it affected the relationship with King. I don't think it was exclusively American. I know our brass-- Mostly MacArthur I think-- down played the role that commonwealth forces did, but the people who fought knew who there friends were--- and we had a cruiser in our fleet named after the HMAS Canberra for awhile (think she was a Baltimore class cruiser)

@DS-xp4jb

7 жыл бұрын

Not exclusively American, but darn close.

@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819

6 жыл бұрын

Fizwalker from what I've read about Admiral King he hadn't liked the British and the Royal Navy in particular for a lot longer that the Battle of Midway. He was in charge in the Atlantic and allowed he opinions to cloud his judgement allowing losses of vital merchant shipping along the American Atlantic coast.

@brgilbert2

4 жыл бұрын

@@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819 I have read that also but from my memory, I thought it was someone high up in Roosevelts cabinet.

The Ark Royal was the only fleet carrier in early WW ll? What about the USN Lexington, Yorktown, Saratoga, Langley, and all the Japanese ones

@Ubique2927

7 жыл бұрын

DawnOfTheDead991 .. America wasn't in 'early ww2'.

@pnartg

6 жыл бұрын

Nick Turner - But he said, "the only fleet carrier in the world" - he didn't say whether they were in the war or not. Japan had some good carriers then, too.

@williamtraynor-kean7214

2 жыл бұрын

Not originally constructed as aircraft carriers, mainly conversions of battle cruiser converted during construction. The Ark was designed from the keel up as a carrier was the point being made.

08:48 - ??? The Swordfish was a 3-seater.

@Ubique2927

7 жыл бұрын

bnipmnaa .. Yes.

@13stalag13

3 жыл бұрын

Doesn't mean you HAVE to launch with a full aircrew. You will probably leave the gunner behind if you are flying in a night attack.

@williamtraynor-kean7214

2 жыл бұрын

Pilot, Navigator and Telegraphist/Air Gunner.

I think it was possible for the allies to have lost the war yes, & it would've depended on the Soviet regime collapsing, which could' ve happened if Stalin had lost his grip in '41.After that yes,would've been v difficult for the allies, tho' I'm not sure that the Axis powers would've wanted or needed to have invaded the US land mass; effective defeat might have been possible without it. I suspect that a stalemate would've existed, with both the Nazis and Japan controlling their own hemispheres.

you forgot casualty figures (military and civilian), they are always a way to tell how many resources are being poured into a war. UK civilian casualties were far higher than the US, so to was military casualties as a percentage as the population, overall deaths for British Empire and Commonwealth were also a lot higher.

well i do believe without each other the allies may have lost. lend lease was very essential example britain helps to supply the middle east and russia while meanwhile us supplies britain and maybe pacific (australia and such) from what i heard the plan was for japan to capture the pacific while nazi germany the europe therefore creating a pincer around america (afterall the world is round) when al is done south america will be invaded first then N america.

The RN must be where you send your slowest and dullest dullards. Every decision requires at least two hours thought (which may include the obligatory wiping afterwards.) I can't imagine the frustration of pilots being forced to live with the wooden-brained. At least they had the public school accent so they couldn't confuse themselves with the need for decisions in microseconds. Their primary battle was never won. After just under 6 years of giving everything their micro-cephalic brains had - for a draw. SWATH was never used, not even once, I rest my case. It's inventor (Creed, teleprinters, tapes) even lived in England at the time. The concept was demonstrated to the Admiralty in 1938 but they couldn't use it. Of course they couldn't, it was new, didn't need oak (RN brain food - after soaking in brine apparently), and threatened the possibility of small unit action. Preposterous! Indeed!

The Ark Royal was a great carrier but it wasn't the only carrier in the world as this film claims. The Americans pioneered naval aviation from dedicated aircraft carriers and had three in the American navy by the outbreak of the war, these were the famous three that by fate and a great deal of luck barely missed being sunk at pearl harbor when it was attacked on 7December 1941. The Americans were beginning to believe in carrier aviation and understood it had much potential although they believed then that carriers would only be the eyes and help protect the battleship centered fleet as it sortied against the Japanese fleet, which is exactly what the Japanese also believed and wanted, one big huge battleship centered fleet engagement that would decide the entire war in the pacific. It was curious the Japanese continued to believe in battleship centered navies considering their attack on Pearl was solely a carrier strike and also considering the Japanese had more large carriers than any navy the world at that ti.e and had a .org better idea of the potential of carrier borne aviation than most other nations at that moment in time, especially their naval genius, who also understood it Japan couldn't manage to completely destroy the American Pacific fleet and consolidate their position in the pacific to such an obvious lopsided degree that could legitimately threaten the security of America's West Coast and this force America to sign an Armistice, in only Six Months Time, the Japan would ultimately loose the war when America's almost unfathomable industrial capacity became focused and up to fill capacity. This genius was none other than Admiral Yammato, who knew America very well as he not only attended college in America for a time but also served in the position of the Japanese Naval Attche in the embassy in Washington for some years as well.He both liked and understood America and Americans but he also, more importantly, and a deep respect for the near unlimited industrial capacity America then possesed, that he believed the Americans themselves weren't then even aware of its tremendous power potential. Ironically it was the Japanese themselves who forced America into a Naval.Strategy reshuffle as instead of being battleship centered, as the navy was until the attack sunk most all of America's battleships. By the virtue of no other choice, even after the Japanese attack proved to most the devastating ability of carrier borne aviation still many of the old battleship Admirals would refuse to see and acknowledge that the days of the battleship reign were well and truly over with the proof spread over Italian and Hawaiian harbors, the carrier became the primary force of the fleet. After the Midway victories even the most stubborn old school battleship navy admirals were forced to finally admit the truth and the battleship became mainly a landing support ship able to provide a huge amount of fire support to the marines as they moved inland and inshore. The battleship thus survived through Vietnam , although brought back briefly in the 80s, until .modern missile technology finally made even their huge guns obsolete. The Americans then quickly built dozens of large and small carriers. The task force that attacked iwo him a had 26 carriers all by itself, half were the large carriers half were the smaller escort type of jeep carriers as they were nicknamed of the kind that comprised task force Taffy during the Philippine invasions that found themselves, along with some destroyed escorts and other light ships, up against an extremely powerful Japanese force entered around the Yamato, and her twin sister, the two biggest battleships ever built, before or since, in naval world history. Through exceptionally brave and courageous actions that followed, with the commander of the American destroyer escorts actually having the audacity to cross the Japanese fleets "T", then making torpedo runs and attacks before many were finally destroyed. Amazingly the Japanese commander then ordered his fleet to turn and withdraw as he couldn't imagine that the tiny pests that attacked him was anything but a thin screen for America's main fleet, worse carriers who would soon also catch him in those narrow straights where they had no room for manuver. Little did he know Halsey was very far away, then trying to futility race back as he had fallen for the Japanese trick of going after empty carriers. Now nothing stood between the huge Japanese force and the now extremely vulnerable American landing forces that the Japanese would have found arrayed before them hepless, huge numbers of landing ships stuffed with many thousands of American marines and soldiers waiting to land and all their supplies in the other ships anchored around them. Not to mention the marines who had already managed to land and would have been simply slaughtered by the largest naval cannon ever put on any ship at any time anywhere in history. The disaster would have been immense and would have most definitely delayed the end of the war by who knows how long, the moral big would have been huge, as well as scandal following. It would have really boosted Japanese moral possibly even giving them false hope of victory making a horribly costly invasion of japan necessary even after the Atomic Bombs were dropped. Halsey should have been court martialed imprisoned then kicked out of the navy for gross dereliction of duty in the face of the enemy reguardless. It was only due to the incredible levels of bravery of those on Task Force Taffy, especially every single salior and officer aboard those tiny Destroyer Escorts--who in my opinion All fully deserve a medal of Honor although unfortunately it doesn't work that way but still they do deserve it fully. It was only due to their amazing stand that Halseys career and reputation was saved from utter ruin and him from that humiliating fate of being thrown in prison then kicked out on his ass. Again my opinion onky, should have happened anyway as what he did was basically unforgivable.

@zzirSnipzz1

3 жыл бұрын

Ark royal was a dedicated carrier not converted from battlecruiser hull also Ark was in action long before american carriers

The airplanes of the Ark Royal ( Swodfish)- crippled the Bismasck, and permited the Royal Navy to have an advantge. It was the day that intercontinental war changed. With ICBM's and fourth generation strike bombers, naval fleets have only have the role of protection of our shores. Remember what argentina did with 6 Exocet in the Malvinas war!

sub don't move very fast either

germany did raid american coast with submarines, supply ships are grounded. the royal navy and planes are able help them leave port and escorted to britain. when DDay accur germany was loosing so wat they do is defend so allies has time to plan. russia is very formidable also hitler want to take stalingrad he split his troops (1 to stalingrad 1 to the oil fields) romour has it the reason germany didnt destroy all brit soldiers at dunkirk is because hitler think brit will join the axis soon

14:33, DeHaviland Mosquito? I don't think that's an Ark Royal attack. :)

Lordy what a load on anti allied feelings. Neither of us/them were perfect. Please dont forget Sea War was made in the 1950's. Im sure plenty of American programms that era where suitably jingoistic. Bit miffed Fitzwalker thinks the RAF had it easy, check out Battle or Nurnburg in 1944. More lost there than Schwienfurt. We were allies, take it easy with criticism.

@iboarshock7059

8 жыл бұрын

+S J This program was apparently inspired by the award-winning US series "Victory at Sea" (available on KZread). I first watched it in re-runs when I was a little kid, and yes, it's a great series for its day (1952-3), but man oh man, does the narrator ever lay everything on thick. In comparison this series seems to be the very model of British understatement and restraint. And I for one have no problem with saying lots and lots of nice things about both the RAF and FAA. (Of course, I do keep a small stockpile of powerful negative comments in store for those who are excessively haughty to us "former-colonials".)

Took oorrff😊

Fairy Swordfish.

@rodparsons6719

3 жыл бұрын

Fairey Swordfish was correct.