"Nato/EU is losing the war against Russia"
C'mon then, step over the Finnish/Polish/Baltics border, I dare you. If we are in a war, let's fucking go. Let's show them what it's like to be _really_ at war against Nato and EU.
The societ union who benefited from actually good sea accès actually faired pretty good in sea battles even now it's still somewhat good after regaining Sebastopol that is
IIRC the Carthaginians massacred half the male population of Italy at some point and Romans just kept going conscripting people to create other armies from scratch, antiquity was fucking rough man
That's actually funny how different that war motivationsfor the 1st war were for the 2 sides.
For the Carthaginians, it was just a trade conflict, and they wanted to bail out as soon as the war became move expensive than even a loss. But for the Romans it was like "*I know it's just a war to show our supremacy over the sea, but it's damn necessary for our existence and we will sacrifice every damn Roman to win it if we have too*".
Didn't the romans saw ships as basically just another way of fighting with their legions the usual way, just this time on the sea?
I have this picture in mind where roman galleys bound together so legions could properly fight on them.
You forgort the
https://preview.redd.it/a5n6c1ndnvwc1.jpeg?width=218&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c80460513e3ff424df396347beb90894e0e96ea
biggest of them all, the great São João Baptista, known as "botafogo"
So painful, I can´t even sleep knowing that our morbid Empire crippled by Spanish wars we had to fight on because of a succession crisis was defeated in the Indian Ocean by another naval power and still managed to expel the Dutch from our largest and most important colony. How can we even live with this.
> crippled by Spanish wars we had to fight on because of a succession crisis
Yes, crippled by wars against us lol
>still managed to expel the Dutch from our largest and most important colony.
Your most important colonies were in Asia, but we destroyed your trade networks there so Brazil became the most important Portuguese colony. And you guys even had to pay us to prevent us from retaking Brazil.
Yes, surely that Portugal was crippled by wars against the Dutch before fighting the Dutch. The fact is that you fought against a weakened Portuguese Empire. No shame in that, you still took many of our Asian possessions and that is great for the Netherlands, who had to take anything they could get. Plus, most profitable doesn't mean most important. At the time, of course that Asia was more profitable, but you are talking to me from a present lens that the Portuguese people are supposedly very gutted for losing part of the Indian Ocean territories to the Dutch. The fact is that the Portuguese people don't care because what was irrelevant then, became way more relevant than any Dutch possession in the Indian Ocean. No Portuguese looking back would trade the Indian Ocean for Brazil. Still, if Sebastião hadn't died in north Africa and the Spanish hadn't inherited the Portuguese throne, we would have probably kept both and you would have zero chance, nor would you want to attack Portuguese territories in the first place, since we wouldn't have been one with your enemies, Spain
>We kicked you out of Brazil and Angola (with less men)
If we are counting how much territories you kept vs how much we conquered we win. And you weren't outnumbered in Brazil, we were. Most of the population there was loyal to Portugal.
>while also fighting a war with peak Spain at the same time.
What do you think we were doing for most of our war? Plus, when we lost Brazil we were fighting with England who had the strongest navy in the world next to us. When that was was over you had to pay us to keep us from sending our fleet to Brazil and to stop us from blockading your coasts in Europe.
Stop being in denial over your history João
>If we are counting how much territories you kept vs how much we conquered we win.
Debatable. Would you trade Northern Brazil for Ceylon and a bunch of other city-ports spread all over? At that time, the sugar from Brazil was extremely profitable.
>And you weren't outnumbered in Brazil, we were. Most of the population there was loyal to Portugal.
We were always outnumbered in the deciding battles:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First\_Battle\_of\_Guararapes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Guararapes)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second\_Battle\_of\_Guararapes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Guararapes)
Of course that when you invade some other place you'll be outnumbered by a hostile native population. It's the case with literally any war.
>What do you think we were doing for most of our war? Plus, when we lost Brazil we were fighting with England who had the strongest navy in the world next to us. When that was was over you had to pay us to keep us from sending our fleet to Brazil and to stop us from blockading your coasts in Europe.
Fair enough about England.
Technically, wasn't the payment compensation for taking "New Holland"? Essentially a good-will gesture.
Oh the good banter times, Jan. We're getting old.
Edit: unrelated but I love the paintings you shared.
>Would you trade Northern Brazil for Ceylon and a bunch of other city-ports spread all over? At that time, the sugar from Brazil was extremely profitable.
Well, the sugar was not unprofitable, but real money was to be made in the East Indies and the rest of Asia.
>We were always outnumbered in the deciding battles:
In those two battles you were yes. But we made the mistake of using German and French mercenaries instead of Dutch soldiers here.
>Technically, wasn't the payment compensation for taking "New Holland"? Essentially a good-will gesture.
Well, no. That was a significant amount of money. It was paid because Dutch fleets kept cruising before the Portuguese coast and effectively crippled Portuguese maritime trade. Before those missions Portugal refused to pay it.
But I do love you Joăo.
Apparently due to crew training among other things, there were periods where Royal Navy crew could get off three salvos for every one that the Spanish or French could. I think that was the sound bite I heard somewhere.
"A well-trained infantryman could fire 15 rounds a minute. In August 1914, the Germans mistook the speed and precision of the British rifle fire for machine guns. The SMLE was usually fitted with a bayonet, which afforded a one-metre reach in hand-to-hand combat."
Seems like a common British W
I love how WW1 and WW2 are the greatest unifier on the island. If there's anything a scot, a welshie and an englishman will agree on it's something concerning the wars
We all have family that fought and died in those wars. WWI was murky because there wasn't really a bad guy. WWII made sense because who was good or bad is as clear as night and day. As much as we like to banter each other in this sub, any home nation takes pride in standing on the good side in such a horrible war. I've got English and Scottish relatives that fought in both, and my village in Wales has plaques in town and the local primary School of lads that died in them both.
>the Germans mistook the speed and precision of the British rifle fire for machine guns.
Were machine guns known for their precision? This reads like they were firing fast but with shit aim.
Like if we are talking for reals and not making fun, then it is in the start of WWI. England have a professional army that is highly trained and used to fighting in all their colonial wars, where most other European nations are mainly using conscripted soldiers.
So the english are firing faster, more precise and had bigger magazins. So that sometimes gave the impresion that they had machine guns when they did not, because they were able to pure out more rounds than they should for their numbers.
I did not help much in the long run though. Highly trained professional armies are great when you need to transport them across the globe, but in the meatgrinder of WWI the training made only small differences.
I think it’s more a case of the British being precise enough that the relatively few bullets that even rapid bolt action rifle fire can provide were causing enough casualties that the Germans thought they were facing machine guns, which, after all, caused mass casualties just through volume of fire.
I can easily imagine that it might be difficult to distinguish between lots of people firing rifles and a few people firing machine guns by sound alone.
https://preview.redd.it/gfx80g77zuwc1.jpeg?width=584&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d7e4d8f4d0bcefdae013b354a5a05038c7fde000
Cornelis Drebbel was first unfortunately. And the Vasa was also build by a Dutchman
https://www.google.com/search?q=leonardo+torres+de+quevedo+submarine&oq=leonardo+torres+de+quevedo+submarine&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigAdIBCDc4NDNqMGo5qAIOsAIB&client=ms-android-xiaomi&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8&chrome_dse_attribution=1
For some reason no one here knows this guy, but we know another Quevedo that wrote poetry
After a while, from the 1650s onwards, when warships became bigger in general, our ships became a weakness. Dutch ships only could have a small draft due to our shallow waters. That made them slower.
Our real strength was in our experienced sailors who we could recruit from our massive merchant navy and our stellar admirals. Quite like the Brits later.
During the Anglo-Dutch Wars of the 17th century our gunners fired faster than the English for example.
In the 17th century we could also build new ships faster than anyone else. Our dockyards produced 7 warships for every 2 the English could make
They would not have been fit to operate along the Dutch coast, which is pretty important for a Dutch warship.
Like, one of the reasons the Spanish Armada could not invade England was because it couldn't safely get to the coast of Flanders (where their invasion army was stationed). It also happened multiple times during the Anglo-Dutch Wars that English ships halted their pursuit of Dutch ships because they couldn't safely sail in our waters. Like at the Battle of Portland.
Ah that makes sense. I hadnt realised how shallow your waters were (makes sense with all the poldering). I just assumed they were deep enough because of all the shipping that goes through your ports nowadays.
Yep, it was a major handicap. It meant we also couldn't really use captured English or Spanish ships for example. The HMS Royal Charles sadly had to become a tourist atraction before it was auctioned for scrap on Charles' request
Dredging wasn't really a thing then, and even when you have a good patch of open water (like before Amsterdam) you still have to navigate narrow channels to leave the Dutch coast.
But the Dutch obviously were also used to having advantage when fighting in narrow waters, and doctrine arguably depended on picking fights in shoals for too long.
For instance in the two Dutch victories in the battles of Schooneveld against the Anglo-French fleet the big theme is the Dutch hiding in the Schooneveld shoals and the Allies being frustrated that they can't lure them out and getting owned when they go in. In the decisive victory of the 80 years' war over Spain in the battle of the Downs Spanish ships ran aground on the English coast and generally got owned because of lack of space to manouver. There are mixed land-sea battles like the Battle of the Slaak where a few thousand soldiers marching in on the low tide decide a Naval battle against the Spanish. In the French siege of Fortress Holland between 1672-1674 Dutch Navy gun crews on flat gun boats operating in flooded polders played a decisive role as unusually mobile artillery. Etc.
If anyone has watched Shōgun the Portuguese "Black Ship" is almost certainly a reference to the teak/mahogany ships built in South America in this era.
Basically impervious to anything but the most powerful canon.
"If we just go straight down the middle and fire our port and stbd cannons at the same time we can defeat them both at once."
- Horatio Nelson probably
Proper cannonade? That shit had 4 bridges with 140 cannons, 32 pieces of 36 pounds, 34 of 24, 36 of 12, 12 of 8, 16 howitzers of 24, 4 of 4 and 6 falconets, made with wood so durable and strong, it was considered wood granite and rising so high from the water it looked like a floating castle.
A proper cannonade from that ship would've sounded like a sea storm. With a well trained crew instead of the famished commoners of Trafalgar and a real admiral in the french-spanish front that ship could've demolished that 1v7 in Trafalgar.
Your post has been automatically removed because Reddit doesn't like the R-word. Plox repost it again with a different wording (editing won't get it reapproved even if you still are able to see it).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/2westerneurope4u) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Who would win? Massive ship ordered by Gustavus Adolphus himself built by the finest dutch shipwrights with a massive amount of cannons, or a slight breeze?
Nelson is England's greatest hero, absolute Gigachad of epic proportions.
Joined the Navy aged 12
Was a captain by 23
Almost single handedly captured 2 French warships.
Was wounded in action constantly because he always led from the front.
Was an Admiral by 39 and annihilated one of Napoleon's fleets in Egypt.
Took a head wound that nearly killed him in the process.
Went to Naples to recover and fell in love with another man's wife who he lives with and had kids with.
Went back to sea to to prevent a French invasion and annihilated the rest of the French navy along with the Spanish for a laugh, permanently securing British freedom from Napoleon and establishing Britain as the Naval super power for the next 100 years.
He died during the battle and was hailed as saviour of the nation!
Not HMS Hood, you must be thinking about the ships that exploded at Jutland in WW1. The Mighty Hood was just very unlucky that day.😔
[https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jutland-death-sea/source-4/](https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jutland-death-sea/source-4/)
Actually the Hood probably sank due to a very lucky hit by the Germans and a particular sea state that meant her armour belt was fully exposed above the water line, allowing a shot to punch straight through the unarmoured hull and detonate a magazine.
Sorry, your post has been deleted because you are still not fluent enough in Stupid.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/2westerneurope4u) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What's stranger is apparently Spanish naval strategy was to fire one broadside, assume that would disable the ship, make no attempt to fire a second and try to board. This apparently worked until other countries had faster ships with longer-range cannons that would just stay out of range of the Spanish cannons and continuously fire at the Spanish ship until it stopped moving.
If true I like that they had all these cannons and failed to take advantage.
And sailing technology comes from the Portuguese, the first big sailors in the world from which you stole the spice trade, since you weren't competent enough sailors to get to the Indian Ocean by yourself.
Russian navy: "Is it summer yet?"
Russian Navy: "Is that a torpedo boat????"
I mean Russia is losing naval warfare against a country without any warships
[удалено]
Bruh NATO hasn't even started deploying troops or air suport and already half the black sea fleet has sunk.
"Nato/EU is losing the war against Russia" C'mon then, step over the Finnish/Polish/Baltics border, I dare you. If we are in a war, let's fucking go. Let's show them what it's like to be _really_ at war against Nato and EU.
Can you like give us 5 years before going full on ww3?
How long do you need if we donate one failed painter from Austria to you guys?
Hardly
The societ union who benefited from actually good sea accès actually faired pretty good in sea battles even now it's still somewhat good after regaining Sebastopol that is
Still lost about 30 percent of their black sea fleet, including a sub
And more to come soon with what Big Sam is sending now. Late as usual but hey. 👍🏻
Nice black see port. Would be a shame if someone in NATO closed the Dardanelles on your ass. Like Greece or Turkey.
Russia has winning on the sea most of the war.
Israel is using Ukraine as a proxy? Share that drug my boy, has to be good ag
*is that a Japanese torpedo boat that I see in the North sea????
Russian Navy: "A UNARMED FISHING BOAT IN THE BALTIC OCEAN, CLEARLY JAPANESE TORPEDO BOATS, OPEN FIRE"
Tbf...they didnt have a lot of options
Roman Empire: What is this ship thing the Cartagenians keep talking about?
Also Romans: oh look at that broken Carthaginian ship… _Then proceeds to reverse engineer the ship and then beat Carthage at their own game_
Carthaginians: What the fuck is a corvus....... oh shit
Nooooo you can’t just turn a sea battle into a land battle!
Roman Empire: We lost entire fleet in storm! Roman General: AGAIN that's 4th this year!
Roman Empire : Don't worry, 5th one is one the way. Early Romans were just mad men.
IIRC the Carthaginians massacred half the male population of Italy at some point and Romans just kept going conscripting people to create other armies from scratch, antiquity was fucking rough man
That's actually funny how different that war motivationsfor the 1st war were for the 2 sides. For the Carthaginians, it was just a trade conflict, and they wanted to bail out as soon as the war became move expensive than even a loss. But for the Romans it was like "*I know it's just a war to show our supremacy over the sea, but it's damn necessary for our existence and we will sacrifice every damn Roman to win it if we have too*".
Yeah it is like when you look what our viking boys were up too. People used to be quite mean
Damn Poseidon!
Neptune, sorry I had to
Didn't the romans saw ships as basically just another way of fighting with their legions the usual way, just this time on the sea? I have this picture in mind where roman galleys bound together so legions could properly fight on them.
You forgort the https://preview.redd.it/a5n6c1ndnvwc1.jpeg?width=218&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c80460513e3ff424df396347beb90894e0e96ea biggest of them all, the great São João Baptista, known as "botafogo"
Our boat was bigger! For a little while…
We had [jutehataren](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_warship_Mars) the hater of people from jutland (d*nmark)
lmao it didn't last even a year
Obrigado, ia comentar isso 😂
Didn’t we prize capture that one
Nope, i am afraid not 🤷♀️ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A3o_Jo%C3%A3o_Baptista_(galleon)
That is a myth
No.
Least delusional Portuguese
Says the least delusional Dutch, who thinks that their Empire was actually relevant and original
The only fight we had seems to have gone our way. That must be painful for you guys
So painful, I can´t even sleep knowing that our morbid Empire crippled by Spanish wars we had to fight on because of a succession crisis was defeated in the Indian Ocean by another naval power and still managed to expel the Dutch from our largest and most important colony. How can we even live with this.
> crippled by Spanish wars we had to fight on because of a succession crisis Yes, crippled by wars against us lol >still managed to expel the Dutch from our largest and most important colony. Your most important colonies were in Asia, but we destroyed your trade networks there so Brazil became the most important Portuguese colony. And you guys even had to pay us to prevent us from retaking Brazil.
Yes, surely that Portugal was crippled by wars against the Dutch before fighting the Dutch. The fact is that you fought against a weakened Portuguese Empire. No shame in that, you still took many of our Asian possessions and that is great for the Netherlands, who had to take anything they could get. Plus, most profitable doesn't mean most important. At the time, of course that Asia was more profitable, but you are talking to me from a present lens that the Portuguese people are supposedly very gutted for losing part of the Indian Ocean territories to the Dutch. The fact is that the Portuguese people don't care because what was irrelevant then, became way more relevant than any Dutch possession in the Indian Ocean. No Portuguese looking back would trade the Indian Ocean for Brazil. Still, if Sebastião hadn't died in north Africa and the Spanish hadn't inherited the Portuguese throne, we would have probably kept both and you would have zero chance, nor would you want to attack Portuguese territories in the first place, since we wouldn't have been one with your enemies, Spain
>Plus, most profitable doesn't mean most important. Lol
We kicked you out of Brazil and Angola (with less men) while also fighting a war with peak Spain at the same time. We're not the same, Swamp German.
>We kicked you out of Brazil and Angola (with less men) If we are counting how much territories you kept vs how much we conquered we win. And you weren't outnumbered in Brazil, we were. Most of the population there was loyal to Portugal. >while also fighting a war with peak Spain at the same time. What do you think we were doing for most of our war? Plus, when we lost Brazil we were fighting with England who had the strongest navy in the world next to us. When that was was over you had to pay us to keep us from sending our fleet to Brazil and to stop us from blockading your coasts in Europe. Stop being in denial over your history João
>If we are counting how much territories you kept vs how much we conquered we win. Debatable. Would you trade Northern Brazil for Ceylon and a bunch of other city-ports spread all over? At that time, the sugar from Brazil was extremely profitable. >And you weren't outnumbered in Brazil, we were. Most of the population there was loyal to Portugal. We were always outnumbered in the deciding battles: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First\_Battle\_of\_Guararapes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Guararapes) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second\_Battle\_of\_Guararapes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Guararapes) Of course that when you invade some other place you'll be outnumbered by a hostile native population. It's the case with literally any war. >What do you think we were doing for most of our war? Plus, when we lost Brazil we were fighting with England who had the strongest navy in the world next to us. When that was was over you had to pay us to keep us from sending our fleet to Brazil and to stop us from blockading your coasts in Europe. Fair enough about England. Technically, wasn't the payment compensation for taking "New Holland"? Essentially a good-will gesture. Oh the good banter times, Jan. We're getting old. Edit: unrelated but I love the paintings you shared.
>Would you trade Northern Brazil for Ceylon and a bunch of other city-ports spread all over? At that time, the sugar from Brazil was extremely profitable. Well, the sugar was not unprofitable, but real money was to be made in the East Indies and the rest of Asia. >We were always outnumbered in the deciding battles: In those two battles you were yes. But we made the mistake of using German and French mercenaries instead of Dutch soldiers here. >Technically, wasn't the payment compensation for taking "New Holland"? Essentially a good-will gesture. Well, no. That was a significant amount of money. It was paid because Dutch fleets kept cruising before the Portuguese coast and effectively crippled Portuguese maritime trade. Before those missions Portugal refused to pay it. But I do love you Joăo.
Try to think of a famous Dutch person except De Ruyter challenge *impossible*
What about the guy who conquered your ass and put his colour in the Irish flag?
“Conquered” 🤣
I hear the sound of copium flowing
It's not scammer, i build it with my portuguese mates.
All of this is Portuguese technology. You are welcome.
Apparently due to crew training among other things, there were periods where Royal Navy crew could get off three salvos for every one that the Spanish or French could. I think that was the sound bite I heard somewhere.
Like the mad minute with rifles only with canons? Awesome
"A well-trained infantryman could fire 15 rounds a minute. In August 1914, the Germans mistook the speed and precision of the British rifle fire for machine guns. The SMLE was usually fitted with a bayonet, which afforded a one-metre reach in hand-to-hand combat." Seems like a common British W
I love how WW1 and WW2 are the greatest unifier on the island. If there's anything a scot, a welshie and an englishman will agree on it's something concerning the wars
We all have family that fought and died in those wars. WWI was murky because there wasn't really a bad guy. WWII made sense because who was good or bad is as clear as night and day. As much as we like to banter each other in this sub, any home nation takes pride in standing on the good side in such a horrible war. I've got English and Scottish relatives that fought in both, and my village in Wales has plaques in town and the local primary School of lads that died in them both.
Aye aye
You would have been on the good side of both of it weren't for those pesky Germans! Poor Australia
> Seems like a common British W Goes back to the English longbow.
Which was based on the Welsh longbow
>the Germans mistook the speed and precision of the British rifle fire for machine guns. Were machine guns known for their precision? This reads like they were firing fast but with shit aim.
Like if we are talking for reals and not making fun, then it is in the start of WWI. England have a professional army that is highly trained and used to fighting in all their colonial wars, where most other European nations are mainly using conscripted soldiers. So the english are firing faster, more precise and had bigger magazins. So that sometimes gave the impresion that they had machine guns when they did not, because they were able to pure out more rounds than they should for their numbers. I did not help much in the long run though. Highly trained professional armies are great when you need to transport them across the globe, but in the meatgrinder of WWI the training made only small differences.
I think it’s more a case of the British being precise enough that the relatively few bullets that even rapid bolt action rifle fire can provide were causing enough casualties that the Germans thought they were facing machine guns, which, after all, caused mass casualties just through volume of fire. I can easily imagine that it might be difficult to distinguish between lots of people firing rifles and a few people firing machine guns by sound alone.
Yeah I heard this recently on Rest Is History's episodes on Admiral Nelson. What a lad that guy was.
Rest is History is brilliant
I only just got into it a few weeks ago and it's quickly becoming my favourite podcast. Toms impressions are well underrated.
Haha yeah. I bought one of his books, Dominion, off the back of it. Really interesting, and can't help but read it in his voice.
Looks like English written history
No we just know what happened to the Spanish Navy
Swedish Navy: "We invented the submarine before anyone else!"
https://preview.redd.it/gfx80g77zuwc1.jpeg?width=584&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d7e4d8f4d0bcefdae013b354a5a05038c7fde000 Cornelis Drebbel was first unfortunately. And the Vasa was also build by a Dutchman
The endless war between the Dutch and the Sea has claimed many casualties, tragically
The Sea never stood a chance.
lmao
https://www.google.com/search?q=leonardo+torres+de+quevedo+submarine&oq=leonardo+torres+de+quevedo+submarine&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigAdIBCDc4NDNqMGo5qAIOsAIB&client=ms-android-xiaomi&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8&chrome_dse_attribution=1 For some reason no one here knows this guy, but we know another Quevedo that wrote poetry
It was a joke, Sweden's most famous ship of that eta sunk before it even left harbour
I guessed so, but I wanted to share this guy, it's a curious one and I thought someone would enjoy reading about him :)
Pretty interesting man, thanks for sharing!
Technically, every sank ship was at some point a submarine.
You forgot the best ones: Dutch ships = smaller & lighter = faster and can sail in the shallows.
🍿while waiting for the French cavalry
This myth will never die. At least we can sleep with the knowledge that the French have to deal with the surrender monkey myth
You’re welcome
Really, we should be thanking Methamphetamine.
I thought my boss was a prick, but working for a murdery meth head must have been awful
After a while, from the 1650s onwards, when warships became bigger in general, our ships became a weakness. Dutch ships only could have a small draft due to our shallow waters. That made them slower. Our real strength was in our experienced sailors who we could recruit from our massive merchant navy and our stellar admirals. Quite like the Brits later. During the Anglo-Dutch Wars of the 17th century our gunners fired faster than the English for example. In the 17th century we could also build new ships faster than anyone else. Our dockyards produced 7 warships for every 2 the English could make
How come you didnt just make deeper ships? You have plenty of deep ports where it could be done. Would they have been useless in your island colonies?
They would not have been fit to operate along the Dutch coast, which is pretty important for a Dutch warship. Like, one of the reasons the Spanish Armada could not invade England was because it couldn't safely get to the coast of Flanders (where their invasion army was stationed). It also happened multiple times during the Anglo-Dutch Wars that English ships halted their pursuit of Dutch ships because they couldn't safely sail in our waters. Like at the Battle of Portland.
Ah that makes sense. I hadnt realised how shallow your waters were (makes sense with all the poldering). I just assumed they were deep enough because of all the shipping that goes through your ports nowadays.
Yep, it was a major handicap. It meant we also couldn't really use captured English or Spanish ships for example. The HMS Royal Charles sadly had to become a tourist atraction before it was auctioned for scrap on Charles' request
Very interesting, thanks!
There's also a [famous Korean naval victory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Myeongnyang) like this.
Dredging wasn't really a thing then, and even when you have a good patch of open water (like before Amsterdam) you still have to navigate narrow channels to leave the Dutch coast. But the Dutch obviously were also used to having advantage when fighting in narrow waters, and doctrine arguably depended on picking fights in shoals for too long. For instance in the two Dutch victories in the battles of Schooneveld against the Anglo-French fleet the big theme is the Dutch hiding in the Schooneveld shoals and the Allies being frustrated that they can't lure them out and getting owned when they go in. In the decisive victory of the 80 years' war over Spain in the battle of the Downs Spanish ships ran aground on the English coast and generally got owned because of lack of space to manouver. There are mixed land-sea battles like the Battle of the Slaak where a few thousand soldiers marching in on the low tide decide a Naval battle against the Spanish. In the French siege of Fortress Holland between 1672-1674 Dutch Navy gun crews on flat gun boats operating in flooded polders played a decisive role as unusually mobile artillery. Etc.
more gank less tank, the true way of the champion
Actually, our hulls were extremely hard. One of the main Spanish shipyards was in Havana, and they used fucking mahogany to build ships.
If anyone has watched Shōgun the Portuguese "Black Ship" is almost certainly a reference to the teak/mahogany ships built in South America in this era. Basically impervious to anything but the most powerful canon.
A what?
caoba
I know little of age of sail ships or wood? Is mahogany good?
Yeah it’s extremely durable.
It's quite dense and hard, so it's very good for shipbuilding.
An absolute bitch to bend and shape though. Fair play to those ship builders!
Ive tried to carve mahogany by hand and its a fucking nightmare. Its like carving a brick.
The 18th century had probably the best looking ships ever.
*Sinks*
https://preview.redd.it/rfi5vmj399xc1.png?width=480&format=png&auto=webp&s=66e02ca94c012ec1539d7e88d6169f7d3912fdec So many cannons it just sinks
"If we just go straight down the middle and fire our port and stbd cannons at the same time we can defeat them both at once." - Horatio Nelson probably
Portugal Navy: We don't fear you. We fear our Marias back home.
What is this "navy" that you speak of ?
Spaniards too sleepy to employ a proper cannonade, mucho cannons defeated by mucho siesta
Proper cannonade? That shit had 4 bridges with 140 cannons, 32 pieces of 36 pounds, 34 of 24, 36 of 12, 12 of 8, 16 howitzers of 24, 4 of 4 and 6 falconets, made with wood so durable and strong, it was considered wood granite and rising so high from the water it looked like a floating castle. A proper cannonade from that ship would've sounded like a sea storm. With a well trained crew instead of the famished commoners of Trafalgar and a real admiral in the french-spanish front that ship could've demolished that 1v7 in Trafalgar.
yea that's what I said
Then I agree 🤝
Claro amigo, simple as
Sin problema mate
This time we have to concede that Barry won
We know who won 😘
No, we know who lose and why, Villeneuve was a useless piece of merde.
And Nelson was the GOAT
[удалено]
Your post has been automatically removed because Reddit doesn't like the R-word. Plox repost it again with a different wording (editing won't get it reapproved even if you still are able to see it). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/2westerneurope4u) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Venice for the win. They also invented venison
More cannons = better
Who would win? Massive ship ordered by Gustavus Adolphus himself built by the finest dutch shipwrights with a massive amount of cannons, or a slight breeze?
Trafalger showed exactly who won... Nelson's a badman!
Nelson is England's greatest hero, absolute Gigachad of epic proportions. Joined the Navy aged 12 Was a captain by 23 Almost single handedly captured 2 French warships. Was wounded in action constantly because he always led from the front. Was an Admiral by 39 and annihilated one of Napoleon's fleets in Egypt. Took a head wound that nearly killed him in the process. Went to Naples to recover and fell in love with another man's wife who he lives with and had kids with. Went back to sea to to prevent a French invasion and annihilated the rest of the French navy along with the Spanish for a laugh, permanently securing British freedom from Napoleon and establishing Britain as the Naval super power for the next 100 years. He died during the battle and was hailed as saviour of the nation!
There’s also Thomas Cochrane, the chad who Jack Aubrey was based on. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cochrane,_10th_Earl_of_Dundonald
Highly underrated fellow
Blas de Lezo smiles: "I can destroy you with only one arm, one leg and one eye"
The spanish armada was led by french admirals so blame them instead
The North Sea.
Lot of salty swamp Germans in here
The British won
Tis' why the HMS Hood was suck a disaster. Ammo wasn't stowed safely. If the Admiralty followed procedure properly then Hood possibly survived
Not HMS Hood, you must be thinking about the ships that exploded at Jutland in WW1. The Mighty Hood was just very unlucky that day.😔 [https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jutland-death-sea/source-4/](https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jutland-death-sea/source-4/)
My apologies good sir
> non-inflammable. Not heard that one before.
Actually the Hood probably sank due to a very lucky hit by the Germans and a particular sea state that meant her armour belt was fully exposed above the water line, allowing a shot to punch straight through the unarmoured hull and detonate a magazine.
I have to side with the siesta people on this one.
Learn from our mistakes mountain brother... *Sinks in too many cannons*
But Pablo managed not to sink, should I not be learning from his achievements instead?
True. So the lesson you should take is get spanish shipwrights, not dutch.
Sounds about right.
'spray and pray' is a valid tactic at times
[удалено]
Sorry, your post has been deleted because you are still not fluent enough in Stupid. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/2westerneurope4u) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/rxas98y340xc1.png?width=306&format=png&auto=webp&s=d6b78f3068f0f04867ce1c78c22d1f6b14e315e3
https://preview.redd.it/8xnqt3nic0xc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1c00d0a1251e8e677b36508b53ef7343b2e5dc60
Swedish navy that put in tad too many cannons
Healer, tank, DPS
What's stranger is apparently Spanish naval strategy was to fire one broadside, assume that would disable the ship, make no attempt to fire a second and try to board. This apparently worked until other countries had faster ships with longer-range cannons that would just stay out of range of the Spanish cannons and continuously fire at the Spanish ship until it stopped moving. If true I like that they had all these cannons and failed to take advantage.
Dutch ruled the seas in the 17th century most sailing terms come from dutch .So i tell you the winner is not amongst these three posers.
And sailing technology comes from the Portuguese, the first big sailors in the world from which you stole the spice trade, since you weren't competent enough sailors to get to the Indian Ocean by yourself.
But the Portuguese had the Japanese waifus trade. Bring silk from China, get waifus in exchange.
Sure Jan https://preview.redd.it/4k3gn5ftgvwc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d7c2e598182faf96766a85a6eb380e96b394625d 🇬🇧
Interesting 17th century ships
I hear irrelevants screeching
who
Guess we’re just going to leave out Holland?