Th story of the Hood and the Bismarck is 'cool' and 'awesome

[hellomartin]

http://www.flodden.net/tour/panel1.php

[wadinga]

From Wikipedia: (which happens to be correct in this case)

Following in the wake of the army came master gunner Robert Borthwick with the artillery, seventeen guns in all, which required 400 oxen to drag them from Edinburgh. The majestic old bombard, Mons Meg, more trouble than she was worth, was left behind. Even so, the whole Scots artillery train was too heavy for a field campaign, and only slowed down the progress of the army. Although the big guns could batter down castle walls, they were difficult to manoeuvre in battle conditions. Moreover, these weapons had to be handled with skill to make them effective: unfortunately James had sent off his best gunners with the fleet.

And:What is certain is that the Battle of Flodden began as an artillery duel about 4 o'clock in the afternoon of Friday, September 9, 1513. With the English occupying dead ground below Branxton, the Scottish artillery roared to little effect. The English artillery, some 22 guns directed by Sir Nicholas Appelby, was lighter and far easier to manipulate. It was also used with much greater accuracy. Soon all of the Scots guns fell silent. The English discharge was now concentrated in an uphill sweep, catching the Scottish divisions, silhouetted against the skyline, in a murderously accurate cross-fire. This, in effect, was the beginning of the end for the Scots. James was now caught like the fourth Earl of Douglas at the Battle of Homildon Hill. His men could not be expected to withstand the English fire for long. But any attempt to redeploy out of artillery range behind the brow of Branxton Hill involved the risk of the army disintegrating in panic. James's intentions at this point are unknown, but his mind was made up by the precipitate action of the men of Huntley and Hume on his left. In the words of The Trewe Encountre, "our gonnes did so breake and constreyn the Scottische great army, that some part of thaim wer enforsed to come doun towards our army."

Well Done, Compass Platform, you're doing a good (cool and awesome) job with today's youth getting them to respect and comprehend history, craftsmanship & the value of knowledge, but they will have to learn to sieve out real facts and justifiable opinions from opinions with no justifications when they trip over them on the web.

All the Best
wadinga

[Compass Platform]

Incidently cannon and artillery were not used at Flodden. At that time only the Chinese and the Turks had very primitive cannon.

Summarised from Wikipedia
English cannon saw its first use during the Hundred Years War at the Battle of Crécy in 1346. The English also used cannon at the Seige of Calais in 1347.
Mons Meg is a large 'bombard' now located at Edinburgh Castle, Scotland. From the Duke of Burgundy's accounts it was made to his order in 1449 and sent as a gift 8 years later to James II of Scotland, with other artillery supplies.

On August 3 1460 King James ll of Scotland was killed by one of his cannons exploding, at a castle seige. The Battle of Flodden was fought on September 9th 1513 , the Scottish king involved was James lV.

Not only were cannon and artillery used at Flodden Field, they were decisive in the outcome of the battle.
The Scots had seventeen guns in all, which required 400 oxen to drag them from Edinburgh. The whole Scots artillery train was too heavy for a field campaign, and only slowed down the progress of the army. Although the big guns could batter down castle walls, they were difficult to manoeuvre in battle conditions.

On the other hand, the English artillery, some 22 guns, was lighter and far easier to manipulate. It was also used with much greater accuracy.

I have arrived at the conclusion that this website uses RF to make outrageous and inaccurate statements to spice up debate on a range of subjects. Is this deduction correct?

[Gerard Heimann]

Not intentionally.

[hellomartin]

CP, everyone is free to voice their opinion, which is what the men on the Hood died for. Anyway, I now certainly know more about the Battle of Flodden than I ever used to! Good to have you aboard and was really appreciative of your initial post, it was very heartening and thank you for sharing it with us.

[RF]

I have arrived at the conclusion that this website uses RF to make outrageous and inaccurate statements to spice up debate on a range of subjects. Is this deduction correct?

No.

Nobody is used on this website, my views are my own.

With regards to Flodden I was not aware of the use of artillery. That is my mistake, which I freely acknowledge and I now stand corrected.

Having said that I don't think that it is outrageous to make what was originally an aside about the use of a phraseology which could give the impression of trivialising what is a serious matter, the fighting of war.
It is unfortunate that it could not have been taken at face value, but assumed to be a criticism of the hobby of modelling or of the study of the technology of weapons and warfare, subjects which are of considerable interest to me.
Others are free to take a different view. But I submit that my original premise was a valid comment.

[Bgile]

No.

Nobody is used on this website, my views are my own.

With regards to Flodden I was not aware of the use of artillery. That is my mistake, which I freely acknowledge and I now stand corrected.

Having said that I don't think that it is outrageous to make what was originally an aside about the use of a phraseology which could give the impression of trivialising what is a serious matter, the fighting of war.
It is unfortunate that it could not have been taken at face value, but assumed to be a criticism of the hobby of modelling or of the study of the technology of weapons and warfare, subjects which are of considerable interest to me.
Others are free to take a different view. But I submit that my original premise was a valid comment.

What upset me the most about your comment was that you attempted to belittle his knowledge of Flodden Field by showing your own ignorance. That you were attempting to indicate that he didn't know anything made your own statement more egregious.

[paulcadogan]

Hi all,

First let me congratulate Compass Platform on the great job he's doing with his pupils - that is "cool" and "awesome"! I was wondering about any involvement of the HMS Hood Association, but I see there are links to their website on the Androssan site. However I think it would be "awesome" if some photos of the models built by the kids could be posted on the Hood Model Gallery and also a link to your site added (if it isn't there already - I may have missed it.)

To RF, I see where you're coming from, and we all understand the horrors of war. When it comes to kids, I find that though you may try to include this when you introduce the subject to them, they are most impressed by the machines, the planes, the ships and their big guns! As they get older their appreciation will increase for the bravery, the pain, the sacrifice, the death and destruction that warfare brings.

I can recall it being that way for me as I grew up and I am currently seeing it in an 8 year old nephew who is fascinated by the ships, planes and battles (thanks to his uncle!!) and has watched "Sink the Bismarck", "Tora Tora Tora", "Midway", "Battle of Britain" etc. over and over. Now, he gets very sombre when we talk about the loss of life involved, but the naval or air battle itself remains exciting. I have no doubt that in the future he will pass all of it on to his children and others and encounter the same response. Ultimately, the memory of those who sacrificed themselves, and the great ships they crewed will live on.

So everyone, though we have differences in opinion, and may make mistakes for one reason or other, let's continue to be appreciative, learn from each other and move forward!

Paul

[FW_Allen]

Hi Compass Platform,

Its easy to see that you are not glamourising war, but trying to make students interested in history. With kids these days, one must take different approaches, and that is what you've done. If I am not mistaken, such a project is meant to help generate interest by first appealing to them through the asthetics and majesty of the ships, but then encouraging them to dig deeper into the ships and the war. If they do their work they should walk away with an understanding and appreciation of the "bigger picture":

1. They should remember and honour those who lost their lives in defence of freedom. In this particular case (fighting the Nazis) it most certainly was necessary to stop that cancer from dominating the world. This is what our Association is all about- remembering our lost lads.

2. Its a reminder that war is terrible and costly...not just in terms of money but most importantly in lives. War is not to be taken lightly or waged for no reason. Avoid it until all avenues are exhausted.

3. Its a reminder that when war is ultimately necessary that one must be prepared to stand up and fight for their beliefs and be prepared to sacrifice all if necessary.

4. Its a reminder how good people can be manipulated and duped into doing dreadful things (in other words, not all the Germans were truly evil, but thought they were being patriotic...as a result many good people on both sides died).

5. Its also a reminder that ships like Hood and Bismarck ARE cool and that mankind has made some pretty impressive machines. Be proud of what the human being is technologically capable of but also remember that man is not perfect...don't be complacent and never underestimate the capability for something to be misused or to fail.

These are highly generalised of course, but I think it demonstrates the big picture of what I believe kids could and should get out of such a project.

By all means, if you would like to post something on the Hood Association website about your project, we'd be most happy to have it. If not, we can certainly add a link to your site. Please e-mail me at admin@hmshood.com

Frank

[RF]

What upset me the most about your comment was that you attempted to belittle his knowledge of Flodden Field by showing your own ignorance. That you were attempting to indicate that he didn't know anything made your own statement more egregious.

I'm sorry that my statements were taken this way, that was not my intention.
The aside was made by me as I then thought Flodden was a little early for the effective use of cannon. I was not intending to belittle Compass Platform or anyone else.

What does concern me more than anything else is how easy it is for countries to ''sleepwalk'' into war. It happened in 1914, and now we have the examples of Iraq and Afghanistan, where our two countries have gone in there for no doubt laudable reasons but without any realistic exit strategy. The US experience of Vietnam provided a lot of lessons that have not been learn't properly.
The fact that teenagers/schoolchildren may have no interest in current or previous conflicts is even more frightening, it makes it easier for future governments to just drift us into war....

[Bgile]

RF,

I agree with your antiwar sentiments. War is sometimes necessary, but it helps to learn from the past. Here in the US we have a very small percentage of citizens who have actually been in combat. That's what tends to happen when you have a professional military.

The Iraq war was a grand adventure with naive expectations for what happens afterward. It also involved misleading the American public regarding the danger it presented to us, and now I believe we have made our position in the world and our economy much worse as a result.

If we hadn't been involved in Iraq we'd have been able to live up to our commitments to the Afghan people, and now it may be too late.

[RF]

For the record I think we were right to invade Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein. Things went wrong from the point Paul Bremner was put in charge of Iraq - it made it look like colonial style occupation. There should have been an alternative Iraq government ready to take charge as soon as the invasion was launched.

[Karl Heidenreich]

As Curtis Le May said: "All war is inmoral... if your let your personal feelings get in your way so you will never be a good soldier..."

War is required when tyranic, oppresive and hostile regimes or ideologies worldwide invades or needed to be stopped. The problem, nowadays, with US is that it try to be humanitarian or moraly high in war. So, an Iraqui conflict that must have ended in 2003 is raging in 2008 because the US didn´t want to end it the only way it could end. Let´s read a bit of history, search for Genghis Khan in Persia: he did the job and went peacefully to find another war in another place.

[Bgile]

As Curtis Le May said: "All war is inmoral... if your let your personal feelings get in your way so you will never be a good soldier..."

War is required when tyranic, oppresive and hostile regimes or ideologies worldwide invades or needed to be stopped. The problem, nowadays, with US is that it try to be humanitarian or moraly high in war. So, an Iraqui conflict that must have ended in 2003 is raging in 2008 because the US didn´t want to end it the only way it could end. Let´s read a bit of history, search for Genghis Khan in Persia: he did the job and went peacefully to find another war in another place.

If Curtis LeMay had had his way, the entire area which used to be known as the Soviet Union would now be a radioactive wasteland.

Since we don't have nearly as many troops with which to keep order as Genghis Khan did, I have to assume your solution to the Iraqi problem would be to nuke all the cites and spread radioactivity in the direction of the prevailing winds.

[Karl Heidenreich]

Curtis Le May knew his stuff...

Bgile:

If Curtis LeMay had had his way, the entire area which used to be known as the Soviet Union would now be a radioactive wasteland.

So what? Nobody would have wept for Nazi Germany being a nuclear wasteland. A lot of us would have never cared less for the commies.

Since we don't have nearly as many troops with which to keep order as Genghis Khan did, I have to assume your solution to the Iraqi problem would be to nuke all the cites and spread radioactivity in the direction of the prevailing winds.

Genghis Khan never tried to patrol those areas... he nuked them medieval style...