Video
HMS Repulse (1892): KSS1 S9 Comment Response
Study HMS Repulse (1892): KSS1 S9 Comment Response, a Dr. Alex Clarke video from 27 Nov 2023, with 14 time notes. Topics include Battleship Classification, HMS Repulse 1892, John Fisher.
Time notes
- 0:00Why the 1892 HMS Repulse and Renown mattered to FisherChapter
The introduction distinguishes the 1892 Repulse from her more famous twentieth-century namesake and connects Repulse and Renown to Jacky Fisher's preferences.
- 1:18QuestionDoes calling older battleships pre-Vanguards expose the same problem as pre-dreadnought?AnswerQ&A
Yes. Both are retrospective labels. Pre-dreadnought became useful after HMS Dreadnought appeared, but it remains historically awkward when applied to the preceding era.
- 1:58QuestionWhy choose twelve-inch guns when larger weapons could hit harder?AnswerQ&A
The twelve-inch system was ready immediately, and Fisher prioritized completing the revolutionary ship first over waiting for a more powerful but slower design programme.
- 5:00Using viable alternatives to judge DreadnoughtNotable Point
A methodological aside shows how feasible counterfactual designs help historians judge whether Dreadnought's actual choices were the best available.
- 6:15QuestionWhat historically grounded term could replace pre-dreadnought?AnswerQ&A
Steam battleship or a related propulsion-based label may work best, but the period's mixed armour and mounting arrangements resist a perfectly clean classification.
- 10:27QuestionShould historians keep using pre-dreadnought because it is more familiar to general audiences?AnswerQ&A
No. Familiarity lowers the entry barrier, but it does not make the label historically sound for the era before HMS Dreadnought. The term may still be useful once Dreadnought provides a contemporary point of comparison.
- 11:19QuestionWas Fisher's preference for Renown mainly about her handling or her first-rate role?AnswerQ&A
It was a combination, especially speed, maneuverability, and adaptability; Renown closely matched Fisher's ideal ship.
- 11:58QuestionCould a Mediterranean commander choose a useful lighter flagship instead of the most prestigious battleship?AnswerQ&A
Yes, and Renown was a strong example: lighter rather than cheaply made, with quality retained despite her nominal second-class status.
- 13:09QuestionMust every Mark 41 VLS version work in every ship fitted with the system?AnswerQ&A
Broadly, but only when the ship and its associated systems have been updated to support the relevant version and weapon.
- 13:55Steam battleships as a name for the transitional eraNotable Point
The discussion develops steam battleship as a possible period label and recommends Andrew Lambert's work on battleship transitions.
- 18:08QuestionWhat layout might carry a Dreadnought-sized battery of 16.5-inch guns?AnswerQ&A
It would probably need triple turrets, perhaps twelve guns in four triples, producing a layout closer to Dante Alighieri.
- 19:55QuestionDoes converting ancient dates into BC and AD create the same retrospective-label problem as pre-dreadnought?AnswerQ&A
It is also a later framework, but BC and AD provide a common dating system and are less objectionable here than naming earlier battleships after HMS Dreadnought.
- 21:37Why the millennium bug did not become a disasterNotable Point
A brief aside explains that the Year 2000 problem was a genuine systems risk whose limited visible impact reflected extensive preventive work.
- 22:23QuestionIs prehistory simply the period before surviving written records?AnswerQ&A
That boundary is too narrow because history also uses oral testimony, archaeology, material remains, and forensic engineering; even cave art complicates the definition of a record.