Aircraft Videos and Images

[WTE_Galway]

Of course from a 2012 perspective we would have been better off if the German fleet was still there sunk rather than salvaged and cut up for scrap.

Imagine all the archeological opportunities and BBC/Discovery-Channel documentaries it would have created.

[arthursmedley]

Originally Posted by WTE_Galway

Of course from a 2012 perspective we would have been better off if the German fleet was still there sunk rather than salvaged and cut up for scrap.

Imagine all the archeological opportunities and BBC/Discovery-Channel documentaries it would have created.

Yeah, this sort of thing does make great TV. I would imagine a few TV production companies are in talks with our Burmese Spitfire hunters right now.
I seem to recall there is a demand for sunken battleship steel today. It was generally of very high quality and more importantly, being beneath the ocean since before August 1945 means it has not been irradiated by atmospheric nuclear weapons testing and is needed for sensitive medical testing instruments, space satellites designed to detect cosmic radiations, etc.

[Pips]

Massie's book is arguably one of the best on the subject of the naval arms race of the early 1900's, it's affect on diplomacy across Europe and it's ultimate contribution to sowing the seeds for war in 1914. It's more than just another book on the Battle off Jutland.

It's broad scope lays down the factors that contributed to the ill feeling that grew between Britain and Germany from the late 1890's onwards. The naval arms race between the two was much more than just a desire by Germany to seek parity with the Royal Navy, it was a direct threat to the status of Britain as the premier world power, it's trade affilations and influence.

A brilliant book.

[335th_GRAthos]

Still reading the book, I found two very interesting passages regardig the sinking of Lusitania (one of the reasons that caused America's entry to WW I):

Originally Posted by Castles of Steel: Britain, Germany, and the Winning of the Great War at Sea by Robert K. Massie

Danger to British trade, the Admiralty believed, would come from fast German liners converted to armed merchant cruisers. Accordingly, the Admiralty subsidized the building of Lusitania and her sisters; in return, Cunard agreed to make the vessels available to the government upon request; their obvious use would be as fast British armed merchant cruisers assigned to hunt down their German equivalents.
The Cunard ships, therefore, were designed to carry as many as twelve 6-inch guns; the necessary magazines, shell elevators, and revolving gun rings in the deck were installed during construction.
When war broke out, Mauretania and Aquitania were requisitioned but Lusitania was left in Cunard service.
On September 24, 1914, the Admiralty officially informed the ship line that Lusitania’s role would be to continue running a highspeed
service between Liverpool and New York with the Admiralty having first priority on her cargo space

Originally Posted by Castles of Steel: Britain, Germany, and the Winning of the Great War at Sea by Robert K. Massie

In fact, there was reason for concern, but it was one of which Lusitania’s passengers were unaware. The ship’s cargo space was—just as the Germans claimed—being used to carry American munitions to Britain.
As Lusitania prepared for her last voyage, 1,248 cases of 3-inch artillery shells—four shells to a case—and 4,927 boxes of rifle ammunition—each case containing 1,000 rounds and the total weighing 173 tons, which included ten tons of explosive powder—had been placed in the liner’s cargo.
Whether this cargo exploded when a torpedo hit the ship has been the subject of many years of passionate, highly technical, and still unresolved debate.

Over 170tons of high explosives on a passenger ship! Good example how little significance "collateral damage" has, since...

And the "juicy" part:

Originally Posted by Castles of Steel: Britain, Germany, and the Winning of the Great War at Sea by Robert K. Massie

Two British publications, the 1914 editions of Jane’s Fighting Ships and Brassey’s Naval Annual, were standard issue aboard every German U-boat, and both publications placed Lusitania in the category of “Royal Navy Reserved Merchant Cruiser”—in effect, an armed liner.
U-20 also carried a German merchant marine officer whose duty was to help identify any merchant ship targets whose nationality was in doubt. Watching the approaching steamer through the periscope, this civilian officer became increasingly certain of what he saw: “Either the Lusitania or the Mauretania, both armed cruisers used for carrying troops,” he told Schwieger. (In fact, at that moment, Mauretania was 150 miles away at Avonmouth, taking aboard 5,000 soldiers for the Dardanelles.)
Schwieger had in his sights what he considered a legitimate target.

And the rest is history.

~S~

[kilosierra]

A very good book!

I bought it, when I started to play "Jutland" from Stormeagle Studios. If you are interested in WWI Naval warfare, I recommend also Campbells "Jutland - An Analysis of the Fighting".


I tend to buy books for my games, when I feel I don`t know enoguh about the period of time. F.e. I have the whole "Black Cross Red Star" series because of Il-2.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos

Still reading the book, I found two very interesting passages regardig the sinking of Lusitania (one of the reasons that caused America's entry to WW I):

More correctly " (one of the reasons used to justify America's entry to WW I to the American public) "

Generally speaking over the last century or so the American people have been far less inclined to get involved in other peoples wars than those they put in power.