Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Who was history's greatest admiral?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
aq8knyus



Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PatrickGHBusan wrote:
At the same time, the British fleet made full use of its knowledge of the Channel when they defeated the Spanish. Nelson also made full use of his advantages. That seems like a basic rule of war: maximise your advantages and expose the enemy's weaknesses while staying away from their advantages!


Oh yeah definitely, I am not taking anything away from Yi because he exploited his home field advantage. Yi was very adept at luring the Japanese into waters that put them at the maximum disadvantage.

It is just that Yi's opponents were no match for his vessels, whilst Nelson's foes certainly were. Plus a victory as one sided as 명량 kinda takes the glory out of it somewhat.

Also La Manche is home waters to the French as well as the British and Trafalgar was fought off the coast of Spain on the open sea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PatrickGHBusan



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Busan (1997-2008) Canada 2008 -

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Was taling of the Channel during the Spanish Armada. Not during Trafalgar.

Also, you are completely right: these navies operated in different settings. Nelson was the admiral of a blue water navy and that dictated tactics. Yi was an admiral in a coastal navy and that too dictated tactics. I find the actual comparison difficult but I can see parallels in each commander making full use of his advantages.

Still, as I said, to me Nelson is in a class of his own.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PatrickGHBusan



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Busan (1997-2008) Canada 2008 -

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

By the way, don`t know if I said so before but that job add in the OP is just retarded.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Smithington



Joined: 14 Dec 2011

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RangerMcGreggor wrote:
Most estimates put the Japanese armada around 100-200 at most.


Interesting, that. So we've gone from an armada of 333 to perhaps as few as 100. Skepticism for the win!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steelrails



Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Smithington wrote:
RangerMcGreggor wrote:
Most estimates put the Japanese armada around 100-200 at most.


Interesting, that. So we've gone from an armada of 333 to perhaps as few as 100. Skepticism for the win!


No, as the person has clearly indicated, and as everyone around here has agreed with and acknowledged from the start, the 333 included both warships and lightly armed transports.

The warships were about 130. The transports, about 200.

Actually reading and learning for the win.

Quote:
In Yi's battles he used his fleet to attack vessels at range because the Japanese couldn't return fire. The Japanese didn't have anything that could be called a warship, their tactics were to get close and overwhelm with a melee attack.


As you say below, skill makes a difference.In the hands of a skilled admiral, with the Korean fleet in the hands of an inept one, the Japanese navy was still dangerous and all but destroyed the Korean fleet.

Another example beyond the Zulu one, might be insurgents armed with Mosin-Nagants going up against a column of regular army soldiers armed with M-16s. Significant technological edge for one side, but in the hands of a skilled commander, or put the other force in the hands of an inept one, either side could very easily lose, and quite badly.

I think the greater edge for the Koreans wasn't so much in ships as it was in cannon. It was like radar vs. optical sights on a battleship.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aq8knyus



Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steelrails wrote:
Smithington wrote:
RangerMcGreggor wrote:
Most estimates put the Japanese armada around 100-200 at most.


Interesting, that. So we've gone from an armada of 333 to perhaps as few as 100. Skepticism for the win!


No, as the person has clearly indicated, and as everyone around here has agreed with and acknowledged from the start, the 333 included both warships and lightly armed transports.

The warships were about 130. The transports, about 200.

Actually reading and learning for the win.

Quote:
In Yi's battles he used his fleet to attack vessels at range because the Japanese couldn't return fire. The Japanese didn't have anything that could be called a warship, their tactics were to get close and overwhelm with a melee attack.


As you say below, skill makes a difference.In the hands of a skilled admiral, with the Korean fleet in the hands of an inept one, the Japanese navy was still dangerous and all but destroyed the Korean fleet.

Another example beyond the Zulu one, might be insurgents armed with Mosin-Nagants going up against a column of regular army soldiers armed with M-16s. Significant technological edge for one side, but in the hands of a skilled commander, or put the other force in the hands of an inept one, either side could very easily lose, and quite badly.

I think the greater edge for the Koreans wasn't so much in ships as it was in cannon. It was like radar vs. optical sights on a battleship.


No the difference was far more profound, the rifles whilst not as advanced as a an M16 still had the ability to hit their target and kill their enemy.

The Japanese vessels at best had half a dozen cannon that were out-ranged by the Korean ships. They couldn't hit back. The difference is akin to that between a spear and a gun.

Although I agree that Yi's superior command abilities allowed the Korean forces to make the most of their significant technological advantage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheUrbanMyth



Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aq8knyus wrote:
[q
It is just that Yi's opponents were no match for his vessels, whilst Nelson's foes certainly were. Plus a victory as one sided as 명량 kinda takes the glory out of it somewhat.

.



Seeing as how the Japanese smashed a much larger Korean fleet (much more than the 12 Yi ended up commanding) prior to this victory when Yi was NOT commanding...the technological advantage doesn't seem to count for all that much. If it was really that overwhelming then the Japanese would have been destroyed. It was certainly not spears against rifles.

Not to mention that the turtle ship was certainly not a new technology...it had been developed almost 200 YEARS ago in Korea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aq8knyus



Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheUrbanMyth wrote:
aq8knyus wrote:
[q
It is just that Yi's opponents were no match for his vessels, whilst Nelson's foes certainly were. Plus a victory as one sided as 명량 kinda takes the glory out of it somewhat.

.



Seeing as how the Japanese smashed a much larger Korean fleet (much more than the 12 Yi ended up commanding) prior to this victory when Yi was NOT commanding...the technological advantage doesn't seem to count for all that much. If it was really that overwhelming then the Japanese would have been destroyed. It was certainly not spears against rifles.

Not to mention that the turtle ship was certainly not a new technology...it had been developed almost 200 YEARS ago in Korea.


The battle of 칠천량 saw a commander fight the Japanese at close quarters which was exactly what their ships were designed for. Yi fought his battles at distance with his ranged weapons, the Japanese had no way of returning fire and were therefore outclassed and outgunned. Yi's also used very clever tactics to lure Japanese ships into difficult waters.

Why is this contentious? Yi and the Koreans weren't Asterix and Obelix. How do you think 12 ships were able to defeat so many? The waters were dangerous and the Koreans could kill without fear of getting hit in return. It is similar to the 9 vessels of the Royal Navy destroying hundreds of Chinese junks during the Opium Wars.

It takes away somewhat from the glory of the battle, but not from the glory of the naval war. The wars showed Korea to be one of the most innovative technological military powers of the age. In terms of Naval combat the Koreans were using vessels that would have been the match and then some of any European navy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steelrails



Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

PostPosted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:17 pm    Post subject: