Quotulatiousness

July 29, 2026

Britain’s new PM is yet another Net Zero fanatic

Filed under: Britain, Environment, Government, Politics — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

At The Daily Sceptic, Chris Morrison points out that moving from Manchester to Downing Street has not changed Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s devotion to the climate change agenda and Net Zero fanaticism:

Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s official MP portrait, July 2026.
© House of Commons via Wikimedia Commons.

Praise the Lord, a Saviour from the North walks amongst us. The UK’s new Prime Minister Andy Burnham has apparently hinted that a tad more oil and gas might be taken from Britain’s remaining treasure trove lying undisturbed in the North Sea. Is this a push back on fanatical Net Zero treason as some commentators have suggested? Probably not. As always there is no need for conspiracy theories – just look at what they supported and said in the past. The new Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh is a green blob-funded whack job straight out of central climate casting, while the new tee-shirt wearing top dog is all signed up to the evil, society-destroying Climate and Nature (CAN) Bill.

It didn’t take long for the bill promoter Zero Hour (ka-ching, Green Blob money) to list the new Prime Minister as one of 193 MPs who support the proposed private member’s CAN legislation that will cut the country’s entire use of hydrocarbons – domestic and overseas – to just 10% within 10 years. Zero Hour notes of Burnham: “In 2024, as Mayor of Greater Manchester, he backed the Climate and Nature Bill because he recognised that Britain needed bold, science-led action to tackle the climate and nature crisis”.

Other more accurate interpretations are available along the lines that the bill is an abominable neo-Marxist Trojan horse that would lead to mass starvation, death and almost immediate industrial and societal collapse. With little or no hydrocarbons available from any source, food supplies would be cut in half due to a lack of fertiliser, while most medicines would be unavailable. In the regular periods of wind and solar drought, particularly in the winter, thousands would die in their blacked-out and unheated homes. Thankfully, the bill failed in the House of Commons when it was debated last year, but a terrifying 200 MPs agreed with its vile contents. Over 90 Labour MPs, all the Greens and LibDems plus two crackpot Tories said they supported the bill.

We can but pray that the two unhinged Tories, Sir Roger Gale and Simon Hoare, are currently receiving sympathetic re-education treatment as the Kemi Badenoch-led Conservative party now rushes towards the Net Zero exit. Similar classes of course are required for wayward Tories who believe that men can become women, and open borders lead to civilisation contentment.

Just three reasons come to mind to explain the heavy support for the House of Commons horror show.

  1. Rank stupidity: If the IQ score of any supporter was much lower, steps might have to be taken to ensure regular watering.
  2. Blinding ignorance: Five decades of dumbed-down education must take some blame, but the inability not to use at least one critical-thinking brain cell is worrying.
  3. Tunnel-vision zealotry: Overwhelming desire to re-order society along State-controlling communist lines – and if the majority kulaks get it, too bad. Inventing a climate crisis without a scintilla of conclusive proof is justified to create an equal, virtuous, brave new post-truth world.

Of course, allowing the two North Sea fields Rosebank and Jackdaw to open is little more than re-arranging the deckchairs on the Net Zero Ship of Fools. Thanks to the 2008 Climate Change Act and later amendments made by the Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May, Britain is legally committed to short-order Net Zero destruction. Unless the legislation is torn up, new drilling is likely to be challenged in the courts. As 2050 looms closer, lawfare will likely stop almost all new projects where emissions are likely to arise from using hydrocarbons.

The small Burnham North Sea relaxation, along with the removal of 5% VAT on electricity bills, is an obvious electoral ploy to disguise the fact that Britain now has some of the highest energy costs in the industrial world – and they are likely to get a great deal higher in the future.

July 25, 2026

The last few hundred years of Anglo-German relations

Filed under: Britain, Germany, History, Military — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

The history of Britain and Germany has certainly had some peaks and valleys since the first “German” king was crowned in London in 1714. Prussia and Britain managed to team up most memorably in 1815 to defeat Napoleon in the Waterloo campaign, but things got much less clear after the Franco-Prussian War that heralded the rise of a unified German state. As long as Prince Bismarck was the guiding hand behind German ambitions, Britain could look at Germany as a relatively reliable continental ally. After the accession of Kaiser Wilhelm II, however, things got rockier quickly. Bismarck got sidelined soon afterwards and the Kaiser decided that the one thing he really, really wanted was to build a navy to rival the British Royal Navy. That, in my opinion, more than anything else pushed Britain into exploring other diplomatic channels and eventually deciding to ally (in all but name) with France. The cover of Jan Rüger’s Great Powers shows the future conflict zone that ensured Britain would view Germany as a threat and not a potentially valuable ally:

As an explicit criticism of the nonsense of great powers rising and falling as if “a timeless truth”, that offered for example by Paul Kennedy, Graham Allison, and Brendan Simms, Rüger, Professor of History at Birkbeck, emphasises the role of individuals and contingencies. His is a book that emphasises human agency, and at every level from that of nations to individuals.

[…]

For the period on which I am a specialist (and Rüger is not), the eighteenth century, there is a degree of nonsense. For example, George I did not have a “reliably anti-French stance” contributing to British “nation-building”. Instead, there was alliance with France from 1716 to 1731, the deployment of French troops into “Germany” to protect Hanover against Prussia and Austria was sought in 1727 (George II was similarly concerned in 1729), and so on. Nor were British interests successfully ringfenced to protect against their use for Hanoverian ends. Any detailed consideration of British foreign policy, or, indeed, the despatch of warships to the Baltic would suggest otherwise. Nor is Rüger correct to suggest that “at the heart of Britain’s national interest” was Britain choosing both Continental interventionism and trans-oceanic policies. Walpole’s determination to keep Britain out of European war, notably in 1733-35, and the beneficial consequences that flowed from this, demonstrates the contrary; as, indeed, did the earlier non-engagement, as in the Thirty Years’ War or against France in 1675-78. Rüger’s Whiggishness draws on a failure to understand the range of views in and on the eighteenth century.

From a German perspective, I would scarcely describe this book as a Bavarian or a Swabian viewpoint. Nor is there sufficient engagement with the extent to which Germany for long in Britain meant the Empire and thus included Austria. That only really ceased in the nineteenth century. Thus, there is on the part of Rüger a degree of anticipation that is misleading. Prussia takes far too central a position too early. This is linked to his misleading account of Prussia as a great power by the end of the Seven Years’ War. Not so, it was more significant by then than Bavaria and Saxony both of which had had their search for status crippled by defeat. However, Prussia also had had its vulnerability amply displayed, notably so to Russia. Furthermore, in terms of “reach”, Prussia in 1763 in no way matched Austria, Britain, France or Russia. Instead, it only became a great power as a result of developments from the 1860s. 1871 still seems to be the lens through which most Germans view their history. That includes Rüger, and is misleading.

So, lots to the good, particularly (but not only) for the post-1871 period; but with significant weaknesses, and notably so for the eighteenth century.

May 31, 2026

The Battle Of Jutland: How Britain Should Have “ANNIHILATED” Germany’s Fleet & Won EASILY

Filed under: Britain, Germany, History, Military, Weapons, WW1 — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

History Undone with James Hanson
Published 13 Dec 2024

James Hanson is joined by Rear Admiral Dr Chris Parry and the YouTuber and naval historian ‪@Drachinifel‬ to discuss the Battle of Jutland. It was the largest naval battle of the First World War and the only time the British and German fleets went head to head.

So just how significant was it and should it have ended differently? This is History Undone.

(more…)

September 28, 2025

S-Boats – Guide 438

Filed under: Germany, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Drachinifel
Published 3 May 2025

The S-Boats, fast attack craft of the Kriegsmarine, are today’s subject.
(more…)

April 5, 2025

World of Warships – Battle Of Jutland

Filed under: Britain, Gaming, Germany, History, Military, WW1 — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Sea Lord Mountbatten
Published 14 Jul 2024

Hey guys! Today I am happy to bring you guys Jutland! Our cinematic on the 1916 Naval Battle of Jutland! Enjoy!
(more…)

October 23, 2023

Hero-worship of Admiral Nelson seen as (somewhat) harmful

Filed under: Britain, History, Military — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

On Saturday, Sir Humphrey noted the anniversary of Trafalgar and indicated that the Royal Navy’s idolization of Admiral Nelson somewhat obscures the rest of the Royal Navy’s historical role:

“Danish privateers intercepting an enemy vessel during the Napoleonic Wars”.
Oil painting by Christian Mølsted, 1888 from the Collection of the Museum of National History via Wikimedia Commons.

There is an argument, which the author has sympathy with, that the RN has perhaps idolised Nelson too much. That while he did much good, the adoration of him comes at the cost of forgetting countless other leaders and battles which have relevance to this day. This is not to denigrate or play down the impact of Trafalgar, but to ask whether we should be equally aware of other parts of Royal Navy history too. Understanding the Royal Navy of the late 18th and early 19th century can provide us with much to consider and learn from in looking at how to shape the Royal Navy of the early 21st century. If you look at the Royal Navy of today and of Nelson’s time (and throughout the Napoleonic Wars), a strong case can be made that although the technology is materially different, the missions, function, and capability that the RN offers to the Government of the day are little changed.

While we tend to fix attention mostly on the major battle of Trafalgar, the RN fulfilled a wide variety of different missions throughout the war. The fleet was responsible for blockading Europe, monitoring French movements, and providing timely intelligence on the activity of enemy fleets. Legions of smaller ships stood off hostile coasts, outside of engagement range, on lonely picket duties to track the foe. The Royal Navy also maintained forces capable of strategic blockades in locations like Gibraltar and the Skagerrak, relying on chokepoints to secure control of the sea.

The UK was a mercantile nation with a heavy reliance on trade, and with the land routes of Europe closed by Napoleon, the Merchant Navy was vital to victory. The Royal Navy played a key role in escorting ships in convoy, ensuring their protection from hostile forces and helping ensure vitally needed trade goods arrived in British ports. This included timber from colonies in North America, vital to building and repairing warships. Similarly British policy to defeat Napoleon relied on supporting continental land powers, and a steady flow of munitions and materiel were sent by sea, escorted by RN warships to Baltic ports to help support nations fighting France.

The Royal Navy maintained forces of small raiding craft to hold the French coast at risk throughout the wars, sending vessels to attack French coastal locations, capturing intelligence and tying down hundreds of French coastal artillery batteries and thousands of men who could have been deployed elsewhere to protect French soil. More widely the UK engaged in strategic raiding and blockade, for example operations in the Adriatic Campaign (1807-14) where a small number of British warships blockaded ports, conducted amphibious operations and engaged in surface combat with different foes. In the same vein the UK found itself targeted by Danish & Norwegian raiders too, who fought the so-called “Gunboat War” from 1807 to 14 against the UK, where many small scale actions between British brigs and small ships against gunboats in the Baltic. This often forgotten campaign saw violent clashes and victories on both sides with the sinking and capture of many RN vessels to protect convoy trade.

More widely the Royal Navy worked closely with the British Army in a variety of amphibious operations, providing ships to deploy and sustain the Army on campaign. There were a number of impressive amphibious failures, but also some successes too, particularly in the West Indies and Egypt, where working as part of a jointly integrated force, the Royal Navy provided fire support (and even operated Congreve land attack rockets for shore bombardment) as the British Army fought the French ashore. In the Peninsular War the RN was vital for ensuring the supply of Wellington’s forces and, where necessary evacuating them, such as during the retreat from Corunna.

April 10, 2023

1970: Welcome to SEALAND | Nationwide | Voice of the People | BBC Archive

Filed under: Britain, Europe, History, Liberty, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

BBC Archive
Published 18 Dec 2022

Nationwide‘s Bob Wellings is winched up to meet the Bates, the first family of the Principality of Sealand.

Formerly HM Fort Roughs, Sealand is a concrete and iron platform in the North Sea about seven miles off the Suffolk coast. What has drawn the family to this remote place? How does living in such an unusual environment effect their day-to-day life? What are their plans for it?

Originally broadcast 19 March, 1970.
(more…)

June 22, 2022

The Day the Viking Age Began

Filed under: Britain, Europe, Food, History, Religion — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Tasting History with Max Miller
Published 21 Jun 2022

For 15% off your first order with Porter Road, click the link https://porterroad.com/MAXMILLER

VIKING BLOD MEAD: https://bit.ly/meadandmore

Support the Channel with PATREON ► https://www.patreon.com/tastinghistory
Merch ► https://crowdmade.com/collections/tas…
Instagram ► https://www.instagram.com/tastinghist…
Twitter ► https://twitter.com/TastingHistory1
Tiktok ► TastingHistory
Reddit ► https://www.reddit.com/r/TastingHistory/
Discord ► https://discord.gg/d7nbEpy
Amazon Wish List ► https://amzn.to/3i0mwGt

Send mail to:
Tasting History
22647 Ventura Blvd, Suite 323
Los Angeles, CA 91364

LINKS TO SOURCES**
An Early Meal by Daniel Serra & Hanna Tunberg: https://amzn.to/3MOJSNb
Anglo Saxon Chronicle: https://amzn.to/3tBBoCx
The Oxford History of the Vikings by Peter Sawyer: https://amzn.to/3zElwml

RECIPE
1 pound (½ kg) pork meat
Salt for seasoning
2 tablespoons (25g) Lard or another oil for cooking
1 ½ cups (125g) chopped spring onion, or leek
2 teaspoons brown mustard seeds, roughly crushed
1 teaspoon chopped mint
1 pound (½ kg) fresh berries
½ cup (120ml) water
½ cup (120ml) mead

1. Season the meat, then heat the lard/oil in a pot on the stove. Sear the meat for 5-7 minutes until well browned. Then remove it and set aside.

2. Add the onion to the pot and cook for 2-3 minutes, then add the water and mead and bring to a simmer. Add the mustard seed and mint and return the pork to the pot. Return to a simmer then cover the pot and place it in an oven at 325°F/160°C for 15-25 minutes or until the pork reaches 145°F. Then remove the pot from the oven and remove the pork to let it rest.

3. Add the berries into the pot with the braising liquid and cook on the stove for 7-10 minutes or until very soft. Mash the berries, then pour everything through a strainer. Return the liquid to the pot and simmer for several minutes or until the sauce reduces down. The sauce will not become too thick without the addition of starch (optional).

4. Slice the pork and serve with the sauce, extra berries, and mint.

**Some of the links and other products that appear on this video are from companies which Tasting History will earn an affiliate commission or referral bonus. Each purchase made from these links will help to support this channel with no additional cost to you. The content in this video is accurate as of the posting date. Some of the offers mentioned may no longer be available.

Subtitles: Jose Mendoza | IG @worldagainstjose

PHOTO
Lindisfarne Priory: Mstanyauk, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/…, via Wikimedia Commons
Disneyland: Sean MacEntee via Flickr, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/…, via Wikimedia Commons
France Relics: Dennis Jarvis via Flickr, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/…, via Wikimedia Commons
Holy Island Sunrise (again): By Chris Combe from York, UK – CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index…
Viking Age Map: By en:User:Bogdangiusca – Earth map by NASA; Data based on w:File:Viking Age.png (now: File:Vikingen tijd.png), which is in turn based on http://home.online.no/~anlun/tipi/vro… and other maps., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/…” rel=”noopener” target=”_blank”>https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index…
Lindisfarne Priory Ruins: Nilfanion, CC BY-SA 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/…, via Wikimedia Commons
Statue of Rollo: By Delusion23 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index…

MUSIC
Battle of the Creek by Alexander Nakarada (www.serpentsoundstudios.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons BY Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/b…

#tastinghistory #viking

February 25, 2022

This tiny railway across the sea has an important job

Filed under: Environment, Germany, History, Railways — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Tom Scott
Published 15 Nov 2021

The Lorenbahn, the Lüttmoorsiel-Nordstrandischmoor island railway, is famous for the tiny, private trains that take residents to and from the mainland. But that’s not why it was built: and it’s got a more useful purpose as well.

Thanks to everyone from Landesbetrieb für Küstenschutz, Nationalpark und Meeresschutz Schleswig-Holstein, and to the islanders, for all your time and patience!

Camera operator: Richard Bielau
Producer: Maximilian Thesseling of Klein Aber https://kleinaber.de/

I’m at https://tomscott.com
on Twitter at https://twitter.com/tomscott
and on Instagram as tomscottgo

September 15, 2021

Hansa – Northern Silk Road – Economic History

Kings and Generals
Pubished 14 Sep 2021

Use our code KINGSANDGENERALS10 and link: https://bit.ly/3mACCeg to get 10% off (save up to $47!) your own authentic Japanese subscription box from Bokksu! Don’t miss out on this amazing snack-journey through Japan!

Kings and Generals animated historical documentary series on medieval history and economic history continues with a video on Hansa, also known as the Hanseatic League, which played a crucial role in the European trade in the late medieval, becoming known as the Northern Silk Road and dominating Baltic and North Sea trade for centuries.

Support us on Patreon: http://www.patreon.com/KingsandGenerals or Paypal: http://paypal.me/kingsandgenerals. We are grateful to our patrons and sponsors, who made this video possible: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o…

The video was made by Michael Merc https://bit.ly/340tcO2 while the script was researched and written by Matt Hollis. 2d art and animation – amicus verus (https://www.artstation.com/amicus_verus). Narration by Officially Devin (https://www.youtube.com/user/OfficiallyDevin)

✔ Merch store ► https://teespring.com/stores/kingsand…
✔ Podcast ► http://www.kingsandgenerals.net/podcast/
✔ Twitter ► https://twitter.com/KingsGenerals
✔ Instagram ► http://www.instagram.com/Kings_Generals

Production Music courtesy of Epidemic Sound: http://www.epidemicsound.com

#Documentary #Hansa #EconomicHistory

This video was sponsored by Bokksu

September 10, 2021

The Channel Dash / Operation Cerberus — How to win through refuge in audacity

Filed under: Britain, Germany, History, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , , , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Drachinifel
Published 9 Jan 2019

Today we look at the Channel Dash, also known as one of the few times Hitler was right, the British were asleep and the Germans succeeded in spite of thinking they were all doomed. An operation made up purely of rolling natural 1’s and 20’s.

May 14, 2019

The Broad Fourteens – Royal Navy Motor Torpedo Boats In WWII

Filed under: Britain, Cancon, History, Media, Military, WW2 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

PeriscopeFilm
Published on 20 Sep 2017

Support Our Channel : https://www.patreon.com/PeriscopeFilm

Made in 1945, THE BROAD FOURTEENS is one of the excellent, dramatized accounts of WWII made by the Ministry of Information for morale purposes. The film shows the first posting, and eventual first action, of a newly-trained motor torpedo boat (MTB) crew. (‘The Broad Fourteens’ is the name given to a patrol area of the North Sea off the Dutch coast.) The film joins the boat and crew at the end of their training (probably HMS Bee, the Coastal Force working up base at Weymouth). The boats featured include 70’ Vosper 1942 class boats, 70’ British Power Boat motor gunboats and MTB 210 — a J Samuel White-built 70’ Vosper which later joined the 13th MTB Flotilla at Dover. The fictional MTB 181 is probably MTB 352, commanded by Lieutenant John M Moore RNVR which joined the 11th MTB Flotilla at Felixstowe after completing her work up. Also featured is MTB 354, commanded by Lieutenant Roland Plugge RN which was the SO’s boat, 5th MTB Flotilla, at Dover. The German flak trawler is in fact an RN Isles Class trawler standing in.

(0:48) Introduces the viewer to how the “broad fourteens” came to exist. Navy training is depicted (2:15). At the training commander’s office (2:25) the film shows the commander and the captain conversing about torpedo and battle experiences and strategies. [Note that they emphasize that Lieutenant Howard is Canadian, although clearly serving in the Royal Navy, as he doesn’t have a “Canada” patch on the shoulder of his uniform.] The crew is shown going through their regular activities. They discuss the previous battles as they are called together. The commander and the captain (5:10) discuss the boat’s impending departure. 5:40 shows the operational base as crews and the commander busily arrive the base. (6:48) operation room as a crew brings a report to the commander. The captain talks about his crew alongside another (7:28). At mark 8:00 the film shows the crew’s residential life. The crew are shown prepping for the first operation as their boats head offshore (9:15) and into the deep sea. The captain is shown calculating the boat’s navigation on his map (10:20). A communication link is established (11:18) and the captain discusses how much longer it is till they get to the operation site. Back at the base (12:20) the crews left converse. The crews are seen at the starmouth arms (14:30), they enjoyed listening to their music at (15:00). The crew takes care of their ship (16:05).

The commander converses with the captain (16:45). The crew are shown in their rooms (17:18). (17:27) is the Starmouth Arms where the crew talk among themselves. The Starmouth Arms manager receives a call which got all crews back to their base (18:40). The commander gives a report (19:20) on the mission and key targets. The meeting closes (20:00) as all crew member are set as they start their engine and move on (21:15). On the deep sea is the navigation map (21:50). At mark 22:20, the crews stops for awhile and takes a break. They move on (22:53). The key target is seen (23:10) and the troops get ready for firing. All crew on set as they wait on the captain to give the go ahead to shoot (23:50). The captain makes the key calculations as the crew stands by for the torpedo release. He gives the go (24:47) and the torpedo is launched out. The torpedo engages the target (25:06). Reports about the operation are documented (25:30) as they proceed to rendezvous point. Two German gun boats are sighted (25:47) as they appear and fire at the crew (26:03). Firing continues till 26:45. There is alarm about fire at the cargo base as a crew is injured (27:00). The fire is attended to as firing continues (27:50). The report about the casualty and the op is documented (28:30). Explosives are launched across the sea towards the enemy gun boats (29:15) as they cool down the heat on them.

Meanwhile back at the base, the film shows the commander (30:00) receiving a visit from his superior, who asks about the mission report as he looks towards the map (30:40). At the battle front, the captain asks about news on the gun boats (31:11) as his underlings all wait in anxiety. The gun boats are sighted (31:38) as they closes on fast towards the crew. At mark 31:53, they opened fire against the boat. A crew is hit (32:15). A gun boat comes in their rescue (33:00) and defeats the enemy boat. Gregory and Johnny are shown wounded. The gun boat (34:00) makes reports and request the course as they depart for home port.

This film is part of the Periscope Film LLC archive, one of the largest historic military, transportation, and aviation stock footage collections in the USA. Entirely film backed, this material is available for licensing in 24p HD, 2k and 4k. For more information visit http://www.PeriscopeFilm.com

May 31, 2018

Admiral David Beatty: “There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today”

Filed under: Britain, Germany, History, Military, WW1 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

One of the outcomes of the Battle of Jutland was that naval opinion finally crystalized over the notion of battle cruisers: the loss of three British battle cruisers during the battle (and near-loss of a fourth) proved to most that the design was flawed and that this class of ships should never have sailed into battle against real battleships. A recent post at Naval Gazing begs to differ on this judgement:

Explosion that sank HMS Queen Mary at the Battle of Jutland, 31 May 1916
Image via Wikimedia Commons.

David Beatty’s famous remark about the destruction of two of his ships by catastrophic magazine explosions during the Battle of Jutland sums up the traditional attitude towards one of the battle’s most famous aspects. Of the 3,326 men aboard the battlecruisers Indefatigable, Queen Mary, and Invincible, only 17 survived. It’s long been believed that the ships themselves were to blame, as they were built with only relatively light armor. Shells supposedly penetrated to the magazines and set them off. Recent research has revealed that this was not the case, and the ships were lost primarily due to defects in operation, not design.

The basic problem with the conventional theory is that no German shell penetrated deep enough into the surviving ships to have been able to set off a magazine if it had hit one. The magazines take up a minority of a battlecruiser’s deck, so if such hits were common, then at least a few of the surviving ships should have seen shells reach their machinery. Instead, German shells were found to detonate with 16-24′ of their first impact with the structure. At the 20° angle the shells were falling at at the time, this puts them no more than 8 feet below the upper deck upon detonation. The only case where shell fragments reached magazine was a hit on Barham at 1758 when fragments from a 12″ shell penetrated the deck over the 6″ magazine. Despite leaving a 12″x15″ hole in the 1″ deck, the fragments had no effect on the powder stored under it.

So is there a different potential cause, one that happened to a surviving ship? A survey of the damage to Beatty’s battlecrusiers reveals a promising candidate. A hit on a turret, such as the one suffered by HMS Lion, could cause a flash to propagate down into the magazine, which would then deflagrate in precisely the manner seen during the battle. A careful examination of Lion‘s damage shows that she came very close to suffering the same fate.

Turret explosions are hardly unknown aboard warships, either as a result of accident or enemy action, and a great deal of care goes into making sure that they don’t set off the magazines. Powder is stored in metal cans or tanks, and flashproof doors and other interlocks are used to make sure that fire does not reach the magazines. Unfortunately, the British had systematically undermined these protections in the search for rate of fire and ammunition capacity, and their magazine practices during the battle can only be described as suicidal.

After the Battle of Dogger Bank, Beatty decided that the reason he was unable to destroy the German battlecruisers was insufficient rate of fire. Not only would opening fire early and firing quickly lead to early hits, but it would also distract the German gunners. However, the British were not particularly confident in their long-range fire control, and began to stuff extra cordite into the handling rooms and other spaces that had been designed to provide flash protection. This was made much worse by a other changes intended to increase rate of fire. Normally, the cordite cases were kept sealed until just before the charges are sent to the gun, but the crews chose to open many of the cases early, take some cordite out of the cases before battle to make it easy to access, and even stored extra charges completely unprotected. In a final effort to make the turrets as dangerous as possible, the majority of the anti-flash safety doors were removed.

The only ship which strongly resisted this trend was Lion, and the efforts of her Gunner, Alexander Grant, deserve most of the credit. When Grant came aboard, he found the situation described above, and quickly reintroduced the traditional magazine safety regulations with the support of Lion‘s captain, Ernle Chatfield. He managed to train the magazine crews to the point where they could provide cordite to the guns faster than the guns could fire it, while observing full safety procedures.

The Battle of Jutland Explained

Filed under: Britain, Germany, History, Military, WW1 — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Ministry of Defence
Published on 25 May 2016

10,000 men. 250 ships. 12 hours. Two sides. The Battle of Jutland – 100 years ago.

June 3, 2016

The Battle of Jutland – Royal Navy vs. German Imperial Navy I THE GREAT WAR Week 97

Filed under: Britain, Europe, Germany, History, Military, WW1 — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 03:00

Published on 2 Jun 2016

The Battle of Jutland or the Skagerrakschlacht was arguably the biggest naval battle in history and a turning point of World War 1 as the German High Seas Fleet failed to break through the Royal Navy’s blockade of the North Sea. The set trap of U-Boats fails to spring and even though more British ships were lost in the battle, it was a tactical defeat for the Germans.

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress