Comentarii la: Navele de linie – Războiul naval în epoca navigației (Pt. 2)

De: NEY

NEY — Thu, 01 Dec 2022 02:24:06 +0000

9:45 While the british did win, wasnt the spanish armada heavily battred due to storms? and was it not so that very little ships were sunk, that in the next year, the english counter armada was defeated by the spanish/

De: Jb Gibson

Jb Gibson — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 22:56:21 +0000

What was the rate-of-fire of the various cannons? That is a subject not often covered. It's my understanding that the larger cannons could only fire every few hours.

De: MateusVIII

MateusVIII — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 22:55:23 +0000

Although large-scale battles and operations truly depended on the huge ships of the line filled with artillery it is interesting to point out the huge role that smaller ships, particularly frigates, still had in the theater of war. Their role in disrupting supply, raiding convoys, harassing coastlines, and gathering intelligence was actually the bulk of naval operations and it is also a scene for many smaller battles and prize captures. I would argue that some of the most interesting naval actions o the 18th and early 19th centuries had to do with these smaller ships

De: Unclerojelio

Unclerojelio — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 17:30:46 +0000

I find it amusing how sailing ships in your animations are able to sail against the wind.

De: Haldir

Haldir — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 15:04:55 +0000

1 Minute in an I already love it

De: Mike Munoz

Mike Munoz — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 09:41:39 +0000

Again the Spanish Armada is mentioned, which resulted in at most 2 to 3 Spanish vessels being sunk or captured by enemy fire, whereas the following year the English Armada lost 40 ships sunk or captured when they attacked Spain.

The really important lesson was that the English ships were designed for combat, being faster, more manoeuvrable, despite many being bigger than galleons, better armed and able to reload their guns easily, as they were on wheels and could be pulled into the hull for reloading. Traditionally ships , like the galleons, were really armed merchantman, which fired once before grappling to fight hand to hand, at which the Spanish excelled. So whilst the galleons were perfect for going to and from the New World with huge loads, the English ships were perfect for fighting and piracy. This is why Spain soon adapted their ships to be able to reload and sustain prolonged gun battles.

The common misconception that the failure of the Spanish Armada resulted in the decline of the Spanish Empire is completely false, and it took a long time and many factors. This is demonstrated by the frequently overlooked War of Jenkins's Ear, 1739 - 1748, which the English lost to the Spanish, resulted in England having 50,000 dead and injured and 407 ships lost, whereas Spain only had 9,500 casualties and 186 ships lost.

De: poil8

poil8 — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:51:50 +0000

actually the original Galleass were sort of galkeys with sails and cannons added that gradually got bigger over time and started to develop into the later frigates.

De: poil8

poil8 — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:31:28 +0000

a bit more complex becuase the cog developed into to divergent styles the style that became the galleon and the style that became carracks. carracks were massive cargo ships that often were very well armed but not super easy to manoeuvre in combat.

De: Jericho Thirteen

Jericho Thirteen — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 06:16:22 +0000

Its pronounced Bow not like bow or bow or bow. It rhymes, with bough not with dough. Come on now its simple English.

De: Luke Skywalker

Luke Skywalker — Wed, 30 Nov 2022 03:55:27 +0000

The crossing of the T was a very devastating tactic used at the battle of Trafalgar by Nelson .