Talk:Home Fleet

The WWI section needs a lot of help. I'm too lazy, and American to fix it. However, the whole thing about "they remained in the harbour thereafter" makes no sense. I don't know the history. What harbor are we talking about? What was the significance of it? --drew1718 11:19, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I have changed the caption to the photgraph. The dreadnoughts on the right are easily identified as belonging to the 'Bellerophon' and 'St Vincent' classes by the twin tripod masts [1]. Since there are four ships visible, the photograph was taken subsequent to the completion of HMS St Vincent in June 1909; and almost certainly at the Spithead Review of July 1909 (Fleet Review, Royal Navy). John Moore 309 17:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

WWII - Hood and Royal York

• Removed the little blurb about the destruction of the hood, mostly becuase it read like it was poorly written. Feel free to add this in the future...72.141.35.80 03:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

HMS Hood is referred to as the 'pride of the navy' here but this term is not found on the wikipedia page for the HMS Hood. The wikipedia page for HMS Hood seems to indicate that HMS Hood was old, in poor condition, and out of date by the second world war. I would have thought the King George V class battleships were the pride of the navy at the time of the sinking of HMS Hood since they were quite new (although the term 'pride of the navy' is also not found in the article for the King George V class battleships). However, the King George V class article does not have the lengthy discussion of faults that can be found on the page for HMS Hood. Mattbondy (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:54, 8 July 2011 (UTC).

The Hood was twenty years old but had been the longest warship in the world for her entire life, so she was quite famous, symbolising the Royal Navy worldwide. Her nickname had been the Mighty Hood as she was as well armed as any battleship of the 1920s and 1930s but with a longer range and higher speed, but by 1940 she had actually been due for retirement as she was by then comparatively old. The outbreak of war prevented that, and she was pressed into use in what was really an inappropriate role, i.e., as a battleship. The capitulation of France in 1940 threw out the British naval force dispositions, as they had originally planned on having the French Navy to share the burdens but the French surrender left the Royal Navy short of ships for the tasks it had planned-for previously. The French surrender was one of the reasons for the difficult times in the early years of the Battle of the Atlantic as British pre-war shipbuilding plans had been based on the assumption that France would be fighting alongside and so the French Navy would be taking a share of the tasks. After 1940 that no longer applied and so Britain then had to find or build the number of ships needed for the multiplicity of tasks they were called upon to perform. This factor almost certainly had an influence on the subsequent events at Mers-el-Kebir.

As a battlecruiser the Hood was really designed for hunting down and sinking the German commerce raiders such as was later typified by the Graf Spee. The problem with battlecruisers was that non-naval people kept wanting to use them as battleships, which they weren't. They didn't have the armour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 15:02, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Home Fleet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/scs028a/HomeFleet.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080715042735/http://www.royalnavalmuseum.org/info_sheets_philip_vian.htm to http://www.royalnavalmuseum.org/info_sheets_philip_vian.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:42, 6 November 2017 (UTC)