I don’t like that

its funny but its true :-( allas

The type 45 destroyer have electric engine running that are power by electric diesel generators I heard it can go on battery power so it can hunt down submarine in stealth

It's funny because it's true, which makes it sad.

A well spoken knock at the both the lack of vision, and lack of appreciation of heritage, in our current societies.

MrTrenttness Or a misguided jab coming from his own lack of understanding of architecture?

You knew this meme before it was funny to that I tip my tea cup shaped hat to you

@@youraverageteadrinker2744 right after you tip you teacup, you have a flying saucer.

oh wow

Totally steampunk! Thanks for your comment.

@Marry Christmas Turbinia was a platform for a revolutionary new propulsion system. Aspergers maybe? That was a very strange comment.

@@Marry Christmas But you replied to a reply to a reply. So you did it wrong?

@Marry Christmas , wow, we have here the definition of 'twat'.

@DATING HARLEY QUINN It is not hard to make a displacement ship fast by making it narrow. At a beam of about 1/11th of the waterline length, it is easy to make a ship fast, but it won't carry much. You couldn't get such a narrow vessel to stand up the the heeling forces of sails, unless you make the vessel a multihull. This is how you make a fast sailing catamaran or trimaran - give the hulls a very narrow beam.

he is the next david attenborough

If you think he's good, you should listen to his fellow Brit, The Mighty Jingles. Then there's that Irishman turned American tank officer, The Chieftain, you could listen to that man talking about paint drying and be entertained.

Emodude that is why I subscribed to him and stayed for several years now. His topics are very varied and that keeps it from getting boring for me. Hope you can enjoy him like I do.

He's good, but what always amazes me most is how he manages to pull these videos off with minimal editing (as in cuts, sometimes even no cuts at all). From what I remember in a past video he once stated as well that he usually doesn't even have a full written script but just a few points and subjects prepared. That's really a talent I'm quite jealous of, many people with enough effort and time can get good enough at presenting a nice coherent video by editing out all the bad takes and mistakes. But few can just ramble on mostly consistently while also being entertaining like him.

I'm sure he'd also mention a few times about how Britain used to have much better grass under the Empire.

@Massive Sigh huh?

Also his abilty to explain it with no stutter or need to cut is outstanding!

TV used to have programmes just like this video once upon a time. I kid thee not.

He's a genius.

Although he does have a rather significant number of visual aids in this video

Make him P.M. He is someone with pride in his nation.

i think i saw on another video that he technically could be knighted because he’s educating the youth or something to that effect

Him and Simon Whistler

I'm American but I must agree. This guy is f***ing awesome.

Sir Lindy of Beige?

The gold painted parts are the ones worth stealing....

@@klauspendolo1393 the ship is sinking! grab the expensive bits!

well,i hope all the offtopics to be like this. thanks.

Were Gold parts safe to touch?

@@nairda55555 As far as I know, yes. The tour I was on just stressed that you really didn't want to touch the red and yellow parts

Napoleon wasn't it?

@@datgood121 yes, I only know it because of Civ IV, the last Real Civ game....

@@sandorski56 Mr. Leonard Nemoy. What a great voice. Perfect for that game. RIP

@@sandorski56 YES! Civ IV is vastly superior to literally every other civ game (sorry Civ III)

Subscribe To Barry civ 5 is really good, it’s just a lot different than the previous 4. Since each one kinda just builds on the previous where 5 completely rebuilt it from scratch. 6 is definitely the worst though.

Which day were you expecting it?

@@Milamberinx thursday

*tea**

@uncletigger i thought kgb was secret. how do you know about this stuff. WESTERN SPY!!!!!!

@uncletigger noice

Grog

If your enemy were the Royal Navy in the good old days it could be a whole lot less. When the french started building the revolutionary first iron hulled ship the Gloria, the British began copying it and actually managed to launch the Warrior BEFORE the Gloria.

after all,it isn't difficult to make a glorified plank float

@@bobthescienceguy6700 correction, a VERY glorified plank. we are in the victorian era afterall

@@gabriel300010 ah yes,ENOUGH GOLD LEAF TO COVER EVERY SINGLE GREAT PYRAMID AND ALL THE ONES IN THE VALLEY OF THE KINGS

Waiting for the English to join the space race. How hard can it be...Warp drive, easy, Engage!

Just how easy can it be? Apparently the White Star Line thought the same when they designed, and had built, the Titanic.

!04 feet long by 9.5 feet wide, Hell, you could POLE that at 20 knots!

Sounds perfectly reasonable. Expensive, but possible.

You can too

As long as you are pedantic at a psycotic level with measuring and experimenting at scale models of critical details you could build just about anything you can afford the materials for.

A guy who lives about an hour from me decided to make his own cruise missiles. The worked quite well and he got shut down after political pressure from the US

Very nice!

Extremely interesting!

Cool

Today we have Elon Musk and his companies working in much the same way as Charles Parsons. Iterative development of novel designs that produce products hobos else can make. Erm they "can" make similar products but making a profit or doing it was well has escaped them all. That said. I worked in power stations that use Parsons turbines. One had a very badly designed governor where one the slightest wear in the linkage held the plant at full load (positive feedback). They all had enormous costs for spare parts with ridiculously long delivery times. We were stuck with OEM for governor parts, but basic stuff was made locally at a small fraction of the OEM cost and with rapid delivery.

The thing still looks modern.

As a current Sonar Op in the Royal Canadian Navy, I second this. The ball pit analogy was very educational, lol. Thanks for another fantastic video Lloyd!

Interesting to this ex-Operations Specialist too, whom, for the last 30 years a machinist.

I was an AW (Acoustic) in the US Navy; 20 years in the P-3. I agree it was a very effective explanation. The main reason the turbine was so inefficient was that it was turning the screws too fast, thereby causing so much cavitation that there was scarcely any actual water to push against. I equate it to chewing whipped cream.

@@jimtownsend7899 I was also an AW, though of the "H" variety ...

Battlehymn63 Dripping Sonar!! Man, I give you credit. To this day, I hate helos. I always said the only way I'd accept a ride in one was if I was giving the "one arm raised" signal while treading water!

When I studied engineering at Newcastle university it was still pronounce turbin.

@@donaldasayers I would get cross too if I were him. He did change the world, much like Frank Whittle or Robert Watson-Watt.

Turbin(e) is I’m going to say is a North American pronunciation, cause that’s what I say.

People forget how close we or anybody's family are to a significant piece of history. Excellent comment.

Parsons designed a particular type of steam turbine, and for that he is credited as being the 'father of the modern steam turbine'. He did not invent the steam turbine per se, and as such the word 'turbine" with an 'e' existed long before Parsons was even born. I'm not arguing the pronunciation (half the engineers of the world have been at it for decades), but I must say that just because Parsons called it a 'turbin' doesn't make it an historical fact. Being Irish, he no doubt would have pronounced many a word differently to English engineers. Just an observation. O.K. Here come the nasty comments... :)

Right out of Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

He is an educated man, you know :)

Shh!

It gave me a chuckle, too. Well-done!

"It's only a model." - Thats also how Donald Trump introduces his wife when they're out in public.

Agreed. Seconded.

...and now, for something completely different, the steam turbine.... - Monty and his pythons.

@@andytaylor1588 now THAT is funny!!! lol

“It’s only a model...” “Shh!!”

exactly! but is the man on speed or something, or both?

And what's worse is that we apparently did it so poorer nations could take over.... that didn't happen did it! More misguided shite by inefficient British politicians.

Martyn James. The British shipbuilding was destroyed by the unions. Just like most of our other industries. Before Thatcher (and Norman Tebbit) put a stop to it, the unions were fascist to the core. (Communism and fascism are the same.) It’s kept secret now of course. Our broadcast media is very left wing as is the teaching profession. The union leaders, some of whom were actually in the pay of the Soviet Union, believed that by destroying private industry everything would have to be nationalised and by that way obtain their socialist utopia. Unfortunately that didn’t work as planned. Practically everything was nationalised, including shipbuilding, car production, steel works etc but nothing run by governments is ever competitive. Socialism doesn’t work and British industry (once the greatest in the world) has all but died. You won’t know this because it’s kept secret, but even Jack Jones, a Trade union leader and once described as the most powerful person in Britain was actually in the pay of the Soviets. I lived and worked in industry during that period. I know what happened. I bet you don’t even know about the “who does what” disputes between unions. Shipbuilding companies (for example) would be closed for weeks at a time as unions fought each other(!) over the right to do certain jobs and the “management” was entirely helpless. And even when not fighting each the unions enforced strict demarcations over who does what. An item could be moved from one place to another, but only so far, by a member of one union and any further movement by a member of another union. And that was the very least of it!!! Also remember, a company could sack you from its employment: but the union could sack you from the entire industry. Workers in industry had to be in a Union whether they wanted to be or not, they had to give money to the union whether they wanted to or not and often had to go on strike whether they wanted to or not. Meanwhile unions used armies of people exactly like Mussolini’s Black Shirts or Hitler’s Brown Shirts to roam all over the country forcing people to strike whether they wanted to or not. All of the above is exactly true. And all of it has been kept secret. That’s the country we live in now.

@@maxmullen6337 The trade unions protect us

@@maxmullen6337 If anything the media in the UK are right wing. Also unions are the reason you don't have 14 hour work days 7 days a week.

Blackforest98, "Also unions are the reason you don't have 14 hour work days 7 days a week." Unions are also the reason many cities and states (looking at you, Illinois and California) are bankrupt in the US. At what point do you think unions outlived their usefulness? Never? As for the sentence I quoted, try being a non-union tax accountant. Those hours are normal for that particular job; I know because I've done it.

Lol

@@BaronVonQuiply "Police arrived and took the gentleman to the station. During the journey, he explained why the Vauxhall Astra is the best police car, in service, anywhere in the world."

@Panakeje Just because you have an IQ of 48 doesn't mean you can just insult someone

LMAO! insanely intelligent homeless guy

:) :) :)

I picture them somehow playing the Benny Hill theme as they do.

Cheeky BASTARDS.

Tommy O Donovan, back when cheeky bastards were men, not lefties shouting some snarky protest rhyme.

@@tealeaf56 The bulk of people building those ships were Union men and Labour voters. Sucks to be you.

Sucks to be a tax-paying resident of California or Illinois, two US states bankrupt because of unions. So what's yer point?

I doubt that he could actually teach you any real science ;D. However, you have been taught quit a bit of very significant naval history :D.

Mandernach Luca what then is “real science” supposed to be? And why exactly would he be incapable of teaching any of this “real science”?

@@kand198 There were some faults in his explaination for cavitation. For example, this phenomenon is not just reduced to pressure but also to heat, boiling water at 1 athmospere of pressure is essentually the same. Also, cavitation propellers or pumps is not due to the speed of the boat but the speed propeller (or rotor). It would also have been nice to see a graph were you could efficiency going down dramatically, when crossing a certain rotational speed. It also would have been nice to make an analogie to aircraft propeller, wich encounter similar problems when going supersonic (essentially efficiency loss but also structural weakening). I don't want to say that he mad a bad job but he's more of a historian, not a scientist and i find the historical part very interesting ;D.

Mandernach Luca he mentioned that the boiling point is a function of both heat and pressure, and did a really good job of explaining some fairly high level thermodynamics in an easy way that did not require any background knowledge. And the way he designed his explanation meant there was no need for a graph. He is in fact an excellent science teacher.

Mandernach Luca also I think the word you were looking for was ‘allusion’ not analogy.

and then you discover the Rothschilds financing BOTH sides.

My copy is nearly falling apart, I’ve read it so many times, although I did notice that, in my edition, one chapter was printed twice.

Truely a great book. I recommend it to anyone. It has a lot of surprising facts in it. Like the real reason for the Great War.

Thanks for the Heads up on the Robert Massie work.

I have that book love it.

Imagine going to a museum at all these days

@@chain3519 sad oof noises

lol

The louvre and the vatican museum are among the highest visited places in the world People don’t go to museums nowadays because of covid but that will change in the future

Someone dind`t watch the video before commenting! ;P But i agree a more in depth look on it would be great too! :)

Well it wouldn't be as impressive as this video because the HMS Dreadnought was sold as scraps after the Great War. Perhaps he could find one of the scraps. Otherwise, it'll be just another video of Lloyd talking to the camera in his room.

Well I've watched the section at 21:20 a few times and I still don't think I understand why building the HMS dreadnought was a bad thing for the british... and I'm usually pretty quick at picking things up. Some of the nuclear power plants in britain had turbines with actual C A Parsons (company) turbines in them - but after several takeovers the once proud company is just part of the Siemens group these days.

@@AurorianKeKe But isn't that more of a problem with the 2 powers naval doctrine and/or a problem with the British overestimating their continued economic superiority? i.e. The British couldn't have waited for our rivals to build a dreadnought first and then said 'ahaa you fools - you've just made it easier for us to keep ahead of you' Starting an expensive arms race could be quite sensible if you were certain you were going to win it - isn't that one view of what the USA did to the soviet union with the nuclear arms race?

@@joinedupjon : because every war ship in the world was obsolete, there was now just 1 ship and everyone including the British were starting with 1 ship. So German needed only to make one ship and they would have an effective navy the same size as the British Navy. Ie everyone was starting from scratch - all other existing ships were pointless.

Lol a great turn of wit

well played!

@@seanrea550 its a circular argument if you ask me

Question in exam for 1st. Class marine steam certificate:- briefly discuss the gyroscopic effect of high-speed turbine on ship’s hull. Answer :- As it spins, it rotates and goes round.

LOL!

2:49

Kinda dead meme by now.

I remember visiting it in the Science museum in Exhibition park in the 1960's

But one thing about the old museum was that the entire ship collection was laid out in glass cases in a well lit hall, unlike the present situation where most are in storage (I hope) and superb models like HMS Nelson are crammed up against the wall in a corner of a dark room. Also the old museum was an exhibit in itself, being the science pavilion from the 1925(?) exhibition and a sort of time capsule of technology of the period. Unfortunately that kind of thing is anathema to the modern curators, as the sad fate of the ship room in the Science Museum in London shows.

@@davidhadaway9311 I remember bunking off school in Morpeth and getting the bus through to Newcastle and going to the old science museum and often on a week day I would be the only person in there other than the staff. It was a terrific museum and as you say, the building itself was impressive. I haven't been back to the North East for over 15 years and didn't even know it had closed until I saw this video. I also remember visiting the Hancock museum just as often.

I LMAO, because it's pretty much True...

Their Upper Lips were SO Stiff they could Deflect Bullets, Shells, and Criticism.

Except the corset of a woman and some skirts !

LOL, it's Stopped a LOT of people...@CipiRipi00

Syphilis.

In the late 1960's I worked (as a civilian) for the Naval Undersea Warfare Center in Pasadena, CA. They had a display in the facility of propellers that were developed for submarines and torpedos. The point of the display was to illustrate how CNC machine tools were first designed and developed by the Navy to be able to produce these extremely complex 3-D forms. Another example of how a technology developed for military use became a mainstay of commercial production.

I can't believe that the Americans spell it 'dreadnaught'.

Fear God and dread nought.

A shame that your navy was late. Try MTB designs- I seem to think the experimental one was built by 1948 in the UK. Then, next, you can look at the Sisters of the Space Age, the Royal Canadian Navy's Tribal class destroyers, built 1969-73. (2x FT4 @ 25000 shp & 2 FT12 @ 5000 shp, replaced by 2x570KF's).

@@ThePeachJames i appreciate the comment and relize the capabilities of other navies. Beside the gas tyrbine system there were many new developments built into the DDG class. There are things that to this day arent posted. Im just saying im proud to have been chosen to work on such a project

@@skipd9164 No problem, but as a OS (=E1) I sailed on HMCS Algonquin & Huron, so have to defend the TRUMP boats :). If we did any more, we would have been capable to do everything with absolutely nothing ! I was aware of the MTB, there is a write up in Model Engineer somewhere around 1948.

@Donald Whitty your correct for pointing out my error (apart) in my writing . Should of been a part. We all make simple mistakes . I'm more of a hands on type of guy than a book person. Thank you for the correction. And by the way check the 3rd word in your first sentence

@@ThePeachJames thank you for your service to your country. I always wanted to join the service but got my girlfriend pregnant in high school. We married when i graduated so i went to work in machining industry. I wish i had taken the military route but i was able to give my kids a great life . Also do something for the navy. Thank u for your comment

A 26 foot sailboat is often about that wide

@@nmarbletoe8210 Thank you for adding nothing of value.

@@Vicus_of_Utrecht how ironic

Best comment in this entire comment section

Thing is, the idea of the big gun battleship was already out there, and was rapidly gaining momentum. The Japanese were toying with the idea in 1904, but didn't get a class into service until 1909 (and that was with two different length models of 12in gun, so gets labelled a semi-dreadnought). The seppos had ordered the two South Carolina class vessels before the poms laid Dreadnaught's keel. The poms had the choice of taking the first step and making maximum use of that head start, or letting someone else do so...

Christopher is absolutely correct, which is tough living on the bottom of the world as Aussies do and are therefore upside down constantly. The USS South Carolina even had the gun layout for all future battleships and cruisers first. Dont be too harsh with Admiral Fisher, if he hadn't commissioned and launched HMS Dreadnought when he did the Admiralty would have been playing catch up to the US and Japan just prior to the Great War. It may have been an "own goal" but it was still the right move to take.

To my knowledge, the reason the yanks didn't get there first was due to congress. Not to mention them cutting down the planned speed comparable to Dreadnought down to a paltry 18 knots due to budget reasons... and hence the South Carolinas despite having a revolutionary superfiring turret layout were pretty much obsolete immediately due to being unable to keep up with the rest of the fleet doing 20 kts once the Wyomings entered the field, not to mention all other navies pretty much settling for the 20 kts as the standard battleship speed

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/qsmcdMWI26jYZ2Q.html

So nobody nicks it

SPENCE4REAL there has been a tank and attack chopper parked in the lawn of the VFW a mile from my house since I was a kid. Somehow no one who knew how to restore and rebuild the internals has snuck by during the night. It seems that disabling the weapons and locking the doors and hatches was enough.

@@M-1996A1 i was just guessing, who would actually steal a tank from a town centre and get away with it.

@@Harry-xu2yn shipping would be a pain in the neck.

@@IamDoogy More like Poles, kiddo - look at the demographics of the immigrants. The majority are from elsewhere in Europe.

Brian Cox the Royal Navy good sir, does not play catch up

@@Alf763 Yeah? What about now?

Whether superfiring turrets were really an advance or just a damned nuisance depends on whom you ask. IIRC Naval Gazing (aka battleship bean) largely takes the latter view. See the comments on his article about Dreadnought. It's just one of many options available to the naval architect trying to squeeze more big guns onto his hull, and every one of them is a frustrating compromise. (Yes, later battleships, such as the _Iowa_ class, almost all use superfiring, but a lot of intervening changes in the technological background altered the trade-offs. Fisher et al considered some superfiring arrangements for _Dreadnought_, but rejected them; it's not as though they hadn't thought of the idea.) This does not, of course, contradict your main point. But where would we be without obsessive quibbling over inconsequential details?

Edward, not the KZfaq comments?

“Catch up” is not applicable. Britain had a global empire protected by and communicated with by water. There was no situation that British government would not spend whatever was necessary the build and maintain a naval fleet sufficient to maintain the empire and protect the home islands. Their policy of free trade allowed foreign powers to build commercial fleets to haul cargo anywhere in the world under the protection of the British Fleet. Germany created the largest commercial fleet and the largest passenger ships in the world,freed from the cost of the naval expense the British would not avoid. The Germans, under a Kaiser who really wanted to be King of England, and a incompetent foreign office, fell into the dead end of Mahans’ theory of naval power, that a nation had to have commercial and naval fleets to be dominate. German built the latest design dreadnought and for every one they built,England built two. In addition Germany was building ships with the guns,armour,and speed to take on the equivalent enemy ships but without the range to reach much farther than the North Atlantic. The British came to realize the fleet wasn’t to acquire an empire but to defeat the British. America was a future threat. While the USN wanted , Congress was very reluctant to appropriate funds for more than two capital ships at a time. The process became comical when Senator Tillson requested the navy submit plans for the biggest ship with the biggest guns possible. He wanted to know where this process was headed, The USN came back every year for more and bigger. The final submission called for 100k ton with 12 20” guns in four superfiring turrets. Named the USS TILLSON, the Navy learned early to suck up to Congress, Money was slow in coming until war threatened. Japan was buying their capital ships from England.

Edmund Hillary would like a word. (Yes, he was a Kiwi but it was a British project and his head of state was the Queen so the point stands)

That's why we invented the thermos flask :-)

In the wonderful book Flashman and the Mountain of Light, it was noted that the British retreating from Kabul may have been more frightened of Lady Sale demanding that the water be completely boiled for tea than the Afghans. Hard to do in mountainous Afghanistan, but necessary. Microwaves don't hack it.

A gentleman has his gentleman boil the tea in an autoclave. Surely, you didn't think they were invented for medical use?

and we never went to the moon because there was nobody to give it back to

The town of Birr was formerly named Parsonstown.

@Dave Rutherford live there too, my mam always took me to the discovery museum when I was little

I’m sure he prefers to think of himself as coal fuelled instead of coke fuelled, far less manufacturing involved and higher burn temperature.

@@dylanmorgan2752 You sure about that? From my boyhood experiments making furnaces, I recall coke being what you use in order to get a high temp. Coal contains a cocktail of compounds which flash off and burn at low temps. Coke is what you get if you drive these compounds out by baking coal. Perhaps a science professional can provide the straight dope on this. . . . but perhaps you have Colombian marching powder in mind :-)

In my mind, if honorary Briton Bill Bryson would tell his "Brief history of nearly everything", in video, it would look a lot like this :D

@@RobertSeviour1 that's coal coke, not coca cola (the layman's coke)

...Monty Python...

Think you ought to e-mail it to him.

Tabourba I bet you’re really fun at parties.

A BIG deal in the days before refrigeration.

@grafvonstauffenburg Today's methods are so wasteful that many projects spend all available funds just getting through the planning stage. If society had always been hampered by people such as accountants and environmentalists I suspect civilisation would never have happened. Perhaps your type would prefer it that way.

Most of those companies ran by engineers went broke.

Like North American Aviation when approached by RAF procurers, who decided to design and produce of a more modern fighter than the existing Curtis P-40, thereby designed, built, and test-flew in only 117 days - the North American P-51 Mustang.

Accountants tend not to make those types of decisions. They just tel you the facts about the finances.

@grafvonstauffenburg "Clutter." Interesting. You've attributed to, and quoted, your opponent a phrase he never used. Also, I'm confused as to your point. I should also say that I am equally confused by Bob Jackson's post. Perhaps you both might clarify your arguments?

We English love and respect our eccentrics. The world is a duller place without them!

There are other kinds?

@@RU-zm7wj there's also the wife-beating football hooligan

@@wasp6594 I wish it were so in America.

@@pierreo33 living in telly

because it contains lots of inaccuracies like at 22:23 where he is implying that pre-dreadnoughts used sails, and that it wasn't until the invention of the steam turbine that ocean voyages without sail were impossible. and its kind of ridiculous that he didn't know better.

They must must be Muricans. They have Freedom, Justice, Liberty and Trump. So, no facts or history needed by them.

@@furry_groyper except he never said that.

@@nonchip he never says it but he implies it, and through out multiple parts in the video for example 17:04 where he says the ships at the 1897 Spithead review were powered by sail for the majority of a given journey. While some ships in the royal navy at that time did retain rigging for sails newer ships in the fleet such as those of the majestic class of pre-dreadnoughts that were present in the same naval review as the Turbinia were entirely powered by triple expansion steam engines.

@@furry_groyper let me guess, you were the smartest person in your class according to you, but you don’t test well. How exactly, on your more accurate version of history, were ships crossing the ocean without sails before steam? I’m excited to learn.

noname117spore incorrect.

I am sure Lindybeige knows this. Also, you must be thinking of a sailing vessel like HMS Victory when he says sails, however, hybrid vessels, which used both steam and sail propulsion lasted a long time. This was due to the design of vessels, which could not hold enough coal to be able to voyage across the Atlantic due to the in-efficient steam engines. So sails where used to supplement the vessel's propulsion to sail across the oceans, but still having the speed and maneuverability of a steam engine when it came to engage an enemy or coming into a harbor, or if the vessel needed to go where the sails couldn't. Most vessels after the Turbinia had a turbine. RMS Titanic (and her sisters) had a turbine on her central shaft, which was fed by the bleed steam off of the outboard triple expansion engines (Another step in efficient engine technology (The piston diameters expand as the steam pressure decreases)). This was great for efficient steaming. (However the turbine on most vessels could not be reversed without high tech (heavy and expensive) gearboxes.

@@lachlanlandreth9069 Look at 17:07 to 18:01 and tell me with a straight face that Lindybeige knew this. I kind of think you missed my point as well. When I am referring to battleships designed with a sailing rig I'm including any battleship designed with a sailing rig. That includes battleships with both steam engines and a sailing rig. HMS Inflexible of 1881 was one of these vessels, and the last British battleship to ever come equipped with a sailing rig. The sailing rig was so useless (as in, it couldn't move the ship much) that they removed it after 4 years and generally considered having ever added it a mistake. Other navies at around this time were dispensing with sails on ocean-going battleships entirely as well. Sails did remain on cruisers for a bit longer, because they needed much longer range than battleships and had less heavy armor, but would vanish on designs built in the mid to late 1880s (sometimes initially being built on a design and then removed shortly there-after because they were just too sluggish of a propulsive system on such ships). Lindybeige is basically saying that the period where ships were propulsed by both sails and steam lasted up until the time of the Turbinia (1897), which is just simply not true. The transition period from hybrid steam/sail ironclad warships to pure steam ironclad warships took place from the mid 1870s to the mid 1880s, a full decade before Turbinia ever existed. The ships Lindybeige was pointing to in the picture had masts for spotting and signaling purposes, not for sailing. The ships with sails at that period in time, although still in service, were already obsolete even excluding the invention of the steam turbine. What killed the sailing rigs on steam powered ironclad warships was the double expansion engine, shortly superseded by the triple expansion engine you mentioned in your comment. These triple expansion engines are what the steam turbine killed (with a transition period of about a decade after Turbinia).

Sail had been eliminated from battleships by the time of Turbinia, but they remained on cruisers and sloops stationed in distant ports where a good coal supply was difficult to secure, with the idea that sails could be used for passage making and coal saved for port manoeuvres and for battle. This continued up to the Condor Class sloops of 1898-1900. In 1901 HMS Condor was lost in a storm on the west coast of Canada. The inquiry in to the loss of the Condor determined that the ultimate cause was the officers and crew having insufficient experience of actually handling ships under sail, so they couldn't cope with a ship under sail under heavy weather. This led to the removal of sails from the last of the fleet that retained them.

@@noname117spore I'm not sure why people are arguing with you as you're 100% correct. Also the statement "the royal navy had been improving ship design by small increments over the past century" was laughable. Just the previous 60 years before Turbinia had seen the biggest advancement in Naval ship design in the last 4000 years.