Do you mean that you are abandoning monetization in favor of donations?

it means I have to move away from KZfaq ads as majority of my income rather fast or else it might not be possible to continue the channel this way.

How about get a job?

matthew freyta he's probably part time

What have you created?

No, they had been well briefed on IJN procedures in Japan

Uh-hu..... So if you are "well briefed" on riding a bicycle you can compete in the 'Tour du France'. Someone "well briefed" on playing the piano can immediately play Beethoven and Mozart. Joe Average gets "well briefed" on playing chess and he can play well against Boris Spassky. No-one gets good at anything without A WHOLE LOT of hands-on practice. And I seriously question your source of information - the amount of co-operation between the Axis was no where near as comprehensive as the Allies. Actually, if you do any reading it becomes pretty obvious that Hitler, Tojo, and Mussolini were all worried that the 'other guy' was going to make off with all the loot.

Lol! You can question whatever you want, I do have my sources and I am well versed in the issue. KM personnel flew with the IJN and observed their operations in order to learn their procedures, the Germans were impressed with the level of cooperation, as were the Japanese when showed the fire control equipment of Scheer. The IJN got to the point of offering full access to its carrier designs to a KM engineer if they agreed to provide the plans to their newest dive bomber, but the germans declined... There is a lt more to that interesting story, but I rather let you walllow in your ignorance... ;)

Hmm, O.K. This ignorant puss goes back to the original proposition. KM Graf Zepplin is commissioned, with originally envisioned air group. Herman Goering has a total change of heart and decides the navy needs it's very own dedicated aircraft. So you are saying the the carrier can begin Atlantic sorties and immediately start - Assaulting Allied convoys Support and direct U-boat wolf-packs Completely avoid contact with R.N. surface units. Whilst suffering minimal air-group attrition ?

Being well-briefed is one thing, practical experience is another. GZ's air groups and the crucial support personnel would have been massively behind every other major naval power with carriers, because they lacked experience in carrier operations. With extensive training and operational usage they might have started to catch up, but they still would have been behind the RN, USN and IJN.

BandB1111111 Lol

That's not generally considered an obstacle towards having a German accent.

Ironic, considering what a hot mess of a carrier Graf Zeppelin was.

yahull

Just like the stuff he's talking about

You can laugh. Btw, english army in June 1940 fled the tail between the legs during what the last french divisions sacrafied themselves at Dunkerque to slow the panzers and allow the brits to reembark, and US army would have most probably done the same than brits, but was absent . Not fool..

felix25ize The British had been made to obey the French strategy due to their smaller number of forces, resulting in France's defeat. Having realised the effectiveness of Blitzkrieg, the British had wanted to counterattack and cut off German supply lines, encircling their forces, whereas the French still thought they were in WW1. It was their own fault that they lost. They refused to adapt to shifting styles of warfare.

The US arrogance about 1940 is out of proportion and completely wrong. The French panzers performed far better than light German tanks and French bravery remained intact (cf Dunkerque). German high command feared French's and never expect such outcome. But France is not Russia. There was no possibility to retreat 1000 km to adapt strategy and prepare counter-offensive. US performed brilliantly in bocage of Normandy (1 tiger = 10 sherman's) Vietnam, Irak, Afghanistan isn't it ? Americans are not specially good soldiers by themselves but the logistics and air support are brillant.

Oh cool he said it in the video! Cool cool. Visit Oscarsborg and handle history with your own hands.

I actually mention it again in the Weserübung video I just uploaded for next week. Hopefully if my Channel continues to grow and flourish in a year I can afford traveling to Norway, Sweden and Finland.

Considering how Norway managed to sink Blücher dead to rights, I love the historical irony of one of the Zeppelin's turrets there.

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized If you ho to Norway you shluld visit a museum in Kristiansand(Norways 5th largest town) where there a 35 cm gun and many bunkers here is a link:kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n9hniaya3ZymenU.html Go to 11:20 to see the gun thats still there!

@@ScawerGaming nice pfp

ODDBALL SOK ah haha thanks good

@@Endorphins27 unoriginal

@Third time Lucky triggered

I know nazing!

It's getting more and more dry.

Who needs an aircraft carrier when Europe is an airfield?

I love the little word jokes he puts in, like führious :-D

i would literally sign up on Reichsbook ! :D

Instagram: insta-gas

Schnappschat.

Sold my Tiger Tank on Shindlers list.

Lol

The fact that it's sitting at the bottom of the Baltic Sea, for starters.

Slick sterzz If we made a $100,000,000 museum arc, I think we can make an aircraft carrier museum.

Laugh all you want, they found it and none other than Ballard has been consulted as to raising it and using it as a museum ship, they are looking for funding, its relatively intact unlike Bismarck and Titanic.

put it could have been ,moored in the upper baltic ,just think of the help it could have given the army ,with dive bombers ,etc,the throuble was ,german navel with one track minds,it could have made the baltic sea ,german,.and kept the russian sub fleet boltted up in leningrad.

In the end, none of [german] battleships were a waste. Sisters did more than enough damage to the British. Bismarck was lost in the first sortie, sure, but those things happen. She didn't went down without a show. And her show was strong enough to let Tirpitz to actually work as fleet in being. Because she was indeed seen as dangerous. It's very telling that operations against Kriegsmarine tied more capital ships than operations against Italy...

@@neniAAinen Very telling that they tied up so much Allied resources, in general. That the allies saw such capital ships as entire threats to the commerce of a nation. Wish my ego preceded me like that..

Oh most definitely. It's weird, usually the advantage of strict monarchies or dictatorships are a clear direction, no quarreling, no uncertainties, especially in war times. That's why some constitutions (including the Republic of Weimar's) have certain powers the head of state can assume during wartime emergency situations. Nazi Germany had extreme internal problems.

Yeah. Contrast the original position of Dictator as defined in the Roman Republic, where the point of pride was originally to resolve the danger and shed yourself of the position as soon as possible (I believe the record was fifteen days). What helped there was the fact that while you could do anything you wanted while you held the position, it had a term limit (variously six months or a year) and you were answerable for your actions at the end of it. Everything had to be justifiable in the immediate context of the emergency.

I'm not so sure. All it takes is for Britain to completely neutralize the Graf Zepplein would just to launch several land-based fighter squadrons into the area. Just as a German Battleship sunk a UK carrier, the British could have easily done that to the Germans, since they for the most part, had naval superiority. People like to overhype Carriers, but they really are support ships and aren't terribly useful for a navy that completely outnumbered and boxed in.

None. Her only victim was HMS Hood (Battlecruiser), blowing up from what seems to have been an extreme fluke shot. However, the battlecruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau surprised and sank HMS Glorious with surface gunfire in the Norwegian campaign, so maybe you're thinking of that.

Charles McCarron hms hood

The RN response would have been to create a counter-force to hunt them down, with significant USN support (as the USA would have been fully engaged in the war by this time), with two carriers and three or four battleships & battlecruisers. The downside of this scenario for Germany is that the problems with the quad-turrets on the KGV class BBs would have been solved by 1942 and the FAA had better aircraft than the stringbags. Also the RN had 3 operational KGV battleships (with another two being commissioned during 1942) and four modern carriers (three Illustrious and one Indomitable), assuming that Ark Royal was sunk in 1941 in this alternative history.

Akm72 Thanks for your considered response. I have also thought about these Allied replies to such an operation. The real operation was planned for Bismarck, Scharnhorst, and Gneisenau, as I am sure you already know. Had it occurred as planned, there would have been quite the fight and, perhaps, Prince of Wales would not have survived the encounter. With both Capital Ships destroyed, the aggressive nature of local UK cruiser commanders might have been somewhat dampened. As with the fates of other, historical, commerce raiders, Radio Intercept would be a definite advantage (though no absolute, considering the experiences of Graf Spee and Thor), and I will grant you an extensive allied effort to hunt them down. However, as I said before, the air component of a British Carrier in 1942, especially the Courageous "class" was limited to biplanes-which were easy prey for the 109. It would come down to Slachtschiff vs Battleship in the end, but the measure of success of a commerce raider (single or group) is not survival; it is how many Allied warships and how much convoy tonnage is sent to the bottom BEFORE its Gotterdammerung.

By 1942 both Courageous and Glorious had been sunk (1939 and 1940 respectively) as had Ark Royal (1941). Britain's primary aircraft carriers were the three Illustrious class ships and Indomitable. The primary FAA fighter in early '42 was the Fairy Fulmar II and (I think) Sea Hurricane on the Furious. Seafire and the Martlet(Wildcat) were deployed later in 1942. Fast battleships & battlecruisers available: six (King George V, Prince of Wales & Duke of York, Hood, Renown and Repulse) as it seems unlikely to me that Force Z would be deployed to the Far East if Bismarck, Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin were all still available for operations, also if Bismarck had not been deployed in 1941 then Hood is not sunk either. In addition to the RN, the USN Atlantic fleet had three carriers (Ranger, Wasp and Hornet) and two modern fast battleships (North Carolina and Washington). The US carriers were using Wildcats in the fighter role, Dauntless dive bombers and old Devastator torpedo bombers. Now I'm not suggesting that ALL those ships would be deployed to counter the proposed German force, but the point is that the Allies had sufficient ships available that putting together a counter-force of two carriers and four battleships/battle-cruisers would be well within their combined capabilities.

Again, BF-109's would have been a joke to operate from a carrier, with it's weak landing gear. Besides that, Graf carrier weak AA armament and small groups of planes with inexperienced crews. She would be food for the RN.

Inexperience? If the RN were so versed in Carrier tactics, Glorious wouldn't have gotten annihilated by facking surface gunfire. Talk about an inexperienced crew, that's incompetent & inexperienced officers pure and simple. Again, i can rattle off dozens where they bit off more than they can chew.

thank you, mainly a copyright issue. fair use in the EU is rather weak and I don't won't my work to be killed, because I got the wrong pic etc.

Robert Cathcart The Wasp was a under powered piece of junk that spent more time in drydock that at sea. Look it up.

in 1929? many of those classes did not exist. Maybe you are behind in education class?

I think it showed it at 10k tons, with 25 to 30 aircraft. Doesn't sound too big. Probably okay for Baltic Sea duty, as originally planned.

That was referring to the first ideas of a German carrier program. The actual Graf Zeppelin was 33k+ tons and had a planned complement of 42 aircraft, 12 fighters, 30 dive/torpedo bombers.

33k tons in usa can do 100 planes, in japan that 80 planes

Me too!

Same here

Yeah, I read them occasionally.

played, more here: militaryhistoryvisualized.com/faq/

Alright, thanks! Now then, what is your opinion on the Japanese version of Graf Zeppelin: kancolle.wikia.com/wiki/Graf_Zeppelin I'm sorry, I'm part Japanese I can't help it.

indeed, very complicated.de

thanks. It was ok, I loved Accept, but due several circumstances I wasn't too happy with the Sabaton concert itself. Saw them 2 times before, loved it back then. One thing that really annoys me that in Germany and now also in Austria the fans think it is funny to scream "noch ein bier" (one more beer) all the time (I guess that is German humor...) and worst of it, for the song "Gott mit uns" the also sing "noch ein bier" instead of "Gott mit uns"... so basically they remove all the insanity of the song... it's like if ManOwaR would replace the words "Hail & Kill" in the same song with "Beer & Chicks"... also they played an acoustic version of the "Final Solution" an excellent song that totally sucks as acoustic. On the good side,they played Winged Hussars in Vienna. I will probably never watch them on German-speaking ground again to spare me the""noch ein Bier" idiocy.

Sorry to hear that. Unfortunately, noch ein bier has kind of spread to everywhere. Every fucking show with the noch ein bier. I saw the Final Solution acoustic on video, and I wasn't impressed. They've been doing that this whole tour, I think. I think I know where they're coming from with the acoustic, though. They stopped playing it for a year or two because they thought that the song wasn't really suited to the headbanging everyone was doing. They felt like the victims weren't getting the respect they deserved, so they tried to bring it back in a more mellow way, so that people don't get all hyped about the holocaust. I missed them when they came to a venue near me for work reasons, but I got to see Alestorm a while later, so that was fun. Keep up the great work, though.

yeah, they said actually "to piss you off we turned one song into an acoustic one". I don't really see the point in it, because play or don't play it, but don't butcher it. I don't think more respect is "given" by pissing people off, not sure about others, but I was extremely annoyed. Love Alestorm live, real awesome "party metal", saw them two times.

The RN started the war with good carriers but indifferent aircraft , the nonsensical system of dual control(the RAF operating the actual aircraft) hadn't long ended before war was declared and the newly independent FAA was saddled with dual purpose aircraft like the Skua and Fulmar that didn't really cut it ,they took over as many Wildcats as they could from French and Greek orders but could never get enough . The Seafire had a narrow undercarriage and the FAA grudgingly accepted the pay of of fragility for performance but it would have been even more problematic for the Germans with limited capacity for getting fresh fighters out to their carrier .

brits experienced that problem with the seahurricanes and seaspitfires, seemed to work out alright. Personally I'd have figured navalised FW190s would solve that issue, though my wonder is as to what the strike element of the Graf Zeppelin would consist of? not sure a Ju87 could mount a torpedo.

Concur on your FW190 comment but that wasn't in service during the planning of the GZ. The JU87C was designed for carrier operations and was outfitted with folding wings. It could carry a single torpedo ...

Not during planning back in 1936, no, but by 1940 would have been a viable alternative to the Bf109 since they'd worked out most of the prototype issues with the early Fw190. interesting that the Ju87 was able to carry a torp, figured it wouldn't have the right fittings. The again, if a stuka could carry a 1000kg bomb, why not a torp? Also, according to the wiki, Fi167 biplanes would have been the recce/torpedo strike element, with stukas remaining divebombers. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graf_Zeppelin-class_aircraft_carrier#Wind_barriers must admit though, if I was a hostile flyer, I wouldn't want to get within 3kms of the Graf Zeppelin, not wiht that number of dual and quad mounted 3.7 and 2cm flak guns. That's an awful lot of fiery shrapnel filling the Graf Zeppelin's immediate airspace XD considering how near ridiculous German warships got in terms of AA profile later in the war, if the Graf Zeppeling ever survived actual deployment, flying near her would be like kicking a hornet's nest.

Very. Not the Wunderwaffe-level of advanced weapon design but taking into consideration that it was a purpose-built carrier and not a conversion it was very high-end ship. The problem was, due to the lack of knowledge and experience in tactics and naval usage of such a ship, the carrier was also outfitted with cruiser type weapons as a support. Compared to Japanese Shokaku-class carriers designed *after* Graf Zeppelin and that were considered 'the best carriers at the time of their construction', Graf Zeppelin had 30.000 more horse power, had the speed of 33.8 knots compared to Shokaku's 34.5. It also had catapults that were not standard for other carriers and even Shokaku did not have them (even though they were planned), was very well armored (Germans had some of the best ship armor in the world at the time), he had wind barriers in place to lower the wind over deck (also a thing not present in some later model carriers), extensive equipment for night-time landings. One of the main advantages it had against even most of late war models was the catapult - that meant that ship did not need to turn into the wind to launch the planes and also meant that take off and landing could be conducted at the same time. Also, it had a system that would warm up the oil planes needed and at least 7 aircraft would be always ready for take off at moments notice. There was a system of steam pre-heaters on the deck for that as well warmed up oil in a separate tank bellow the deck for the rest of the planes. All that meant that Graf Zeppelin could launch its planes way faster than any other ship of the type. So, to cut it short and summarize, it was very well designed ship and quite advanced for its time, surpassing even some of the late war models by far in some areas. Its main flaws were relatively small aircraft complement compared to other ships of the class (Graf Zeppelin had 43 planned while Shokaku for instance had 84) and the arguably pointless addition of cruiser type anti-ship armament. It should have been replaced by more anti-air guns (although it already had more than many other carriers - so maybe not even that). So had it been completed it would have been quite a weapon system. Even until the very end of the war. But that would not mean anything unless it had a fleet of ships to operate with - even a way inferior carrier with support fleet is better than superior one with poor or no fleet at all. But as an individual ship, it really was advanced. A thing you'd expect from German engineers. Some might even say that it was over-engineered. :)

Even with a catapult and windbreaks - I think it would be very risky to launch a 109 with any sort of crosswind (and even modern carriers turn into wind to launch and recover aircraft). Similarly recovering aircraft without an angled flight deck means that any pilot who has to go around is going to need the front of the ship clear - so catapults wouldn't avoid that either. Plus that's a lot of unproven newly designed technology for a navy with no history of carrier operations to get their head around with no opportunity to work the ship up in safe waters... On paper fine, in practice never going to happen...

Tom Riley Of course, any operation would be carried out in the most optimal manner, the thing is that this ship in particular could do it some other way as well unlike other designs. And the guy asked if was the ship advanced, not if Kriegsmarine had the ability to operate it to its full capacity. The ship was very advanced compared to other carriers of its time and Germans would have learned to operate it, just like others did. Mind you, carrier doctrine was still refined at the time, it was the newest weapon on the battlefield. As for the safe waters - Baltic. The same area where German subs were trained.

Advanced? Yes. Very good? meh. Very good ship for being a first but here is why I don't completely agree with Aleksander's judgement. Going towards the wind is not mandatory for any carrier. Most planes should be able to land on a no-wind and stationary carrier condition. For example the A6M have low stall speed hence can take off and land in short distance. The requirement comes from the need to fill the deck with aircraft, hence the first few planes have less take off space. Furthermore, if they are heavier aircraft with large combat loads, this becomes even more important. Hence it is generally preferred to do so even in modern times. But modern times is more catapult reliant. Catapults is not a major advantage as one would think. While this allow more options for heavier aircrafts; there is only a limited amount of catapults. Only two aircrafts could be launched this way. Do note these are old style ones, not modern catapult designs. Which means it will have a very low sortie rate.Turning in to the wind will allow a more conventional way of launching aircraft but in a lot larger numbers and hence quicker. But this problem was somewhat mitigated anyways and allowed 18 aircrafts in 6 minutes, so not that big of a deal. But by then it will run out of steam and takes a long time to bring up. And you would need to split the 18 aircrafts between 2-3 types of planes. This will not give you much offensive ability. A wind barrier would not be useful under this circumstance since to launch a sufficient attack wave, you would want to turn towards the wind regardless and use it to your advantage. Wind barrier would be useful if the wind comes perpendicular which won't affect the 2 catapult launched planes much anyways. Though do note that the carrier based version oft he Stuka and BF109 is heavier. So conventional launch without wind is most likely out of the question. Landing would also still require you to go towards the wind regardless. Catapults wouldn't help shorten the landing or provide more lift during landings. It also won't allow you to launch and recover aircrafts at the same time. Since you need a clear deck for aircrafts to take off again should landing be aborted. Or in rarer cases where a crash net is set up... Usually for a damaged aircraft.. A place where landed aircrafts can be quickly placed(towards bow) is required during such emergencies. As for the 15cm guns, yes they are entirely useless. And I would reckon they should replace it with AA. While Graf Zeppelin had a lot of AA guns, it is not enough. As seen in the Pacific theater, the US navy struggled against air targets to the final days of the war with AA systems that are much more effective and in similar if not even more guns. You can never have too much AA guns. The good things about it is the warming of oil. Though US and Japanese ships didn't really need it since they mostly operated in the Pacific area which is fairly warm to say the least. It would be another complicated system for them. For Germany, this is a major advantage as they would operate in the colder northern Atlantic and Baltic. The 8 aircrafts that can be heated will help it launch CAP quickly even if surprised attacked. Combined with Catapult, which can quickly launch 2 fighters without maneuvering is also great at defensive purposes. The low aircraft compliment is a disadvantage. Against any large naval task force, this would not be enough. Based on the Pacific theater, you would need a lot more. The aircraft compliment isn't exactly ideal either. Stuka is a excellent bomber, most advanced dive bomber. However they are slow and not very agile. They can be easily picked off without fighter support. The 1939 compliment was 12 fighters and 30 bombers. I would say that is not enough escort to assure air superiority which is what Stuka needs to operate effectively. You can see the Stuka's dependence on air superiority in Europe. Their payload is also too small to be capital ships killer. The 1930 compliment with 30 fighters is more reasonable. By the end of the war, both Japan and US had more fighters than bombers. Early war compliment was opposite. But I think we all can see why such changes were made. And if Graf Zeppelin wants to succeed, it should follow suit. The Fi-167 would give it anti-capital ship capability but a slow biplane is going to get eaten up rather quickly, and you are splitting an already small compliment to 3 different types of aircrafts. A less important thing but still notable in carrier operations is the BF109. Due to how far back the cockpit is, it will have poor vision when landing and taking off. The pilot will struggle to see the deck much like the F4U... Dangerous to say the least. the narrow landing gear also is dangerous for carrier operation where waves can risk topping it over. A wing mounted one would allow a far better balance. Given how strong waves can be in the Atlantic, as evidence with the "Atlantic bow," this can pose quite a bit of a problem. Overall opinion of the ship: The amount of AA, catapult and oil heater allows it to be a great carrier for air defensive purposes. The radar give it early warning capabilities. Japan did not have this until late-1943 and 1944. US however do have this. The speed but light compliment suits a 'light carrier' role than a fleet carrier one; especially when combined with its air defense capability. It is only really useful in bombing smaller warships like merchants , destroyers and cruisers. Which is within the Kriegsmarine original intention of the ship. It is not suitable as a actual fleet carrier(main offensive weapon and flagship of the fleet) so one should not expect it to defeat any of the US or Japanese fleet carriers in a battle.

Neurofied Yamato You basically said that Graf Zeppelin had everything all other carriers had and then some more. And you made a mistake with oil heaters - they did not need it because they operated in colder waters but because the oil needed to be 60C (or 140F) warm - temperatures don't go that high even in the Pacific. So yes, even Pacific carriers would have a great use for that. And Zeppelin had 7 for stand buy duty, the rest could be filled with warm oil under the deck then raised, it did not have a cap of 7 planes to be fueled that way. It was the same as any flat deck of other countries, except it has some additional things that made it sometimes better, or did nothing. But it did not *lack* anything.

and multi-moustaches of the Kaiser, lol

FW190 was put into production in late 1940/1941. The Graf Zeppelin plans were made before 1939 and before the FW190's first use.

@@waffle6340 That makes sense. Still, given the long developmental period of the Graf Zeppelin, I would think that the plans would have been reevaluated to use the better suited FW-190 as a carrier-borne fighter. Currently, I don't have a model of a Bf-109T. But I'm considering modeling a hypothetical FW-190 shipboard derivative using an old Monogram kit.

@@modelermark172 you do scale modeling? nice. I started recently with a BF109E. It's a real nice hobby.

@@waffle6340 I've been building plastic (and some wooden) models for more than half a century. One project I did about 10 years ago was to build a carrier version of an Me-262 in 1/72 scale. I gave it folding wings, a tailhook, and painted it based on the Bf-109T. I understand that the Me-262's troublesome nosegear would not have been good on a carrier, and that the Jumo 004B's would have quickly choked on the wet, salty air. But it looks cool . . . . Happy Modeling! You couldn't have chosen a better hobby!

@@modelermark172 do you brush paint or airbrush? i was lucky enough to be gifted an airbrush for my birthday, but I did use brush for the canopy of the plane. also what is your favorite paint? i really liked tamiya and how easy it is to airbrush it

Compared to the Shokaku, the Zeppelin was a slight bit larger and faster, but had space for only 42 planes, instead of 72 on the Shokaku. The initial planes were to be the Bf-109T and Ju-87C.

I can make a guess on who your favorite austrian is

@@ZtivomTheGreatest Arnie?

sparviero142 I can't say I'm particularly familiar with the design details of either of these carriers. That being said, I imagine the difference would be attributed to the deck size. The Graf Zeppelin probably had larger portions of the deck taken by other functions.

Also weight, everything from armor to crew adds weight, limiting what can be carried.