Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918: Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2Various
History
Current History: A Monthly Magazine of the New York Times, May 1918: Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 2
Various
World War, 1914-1918
It is stated in Vice Admiral Beatty's report that it was over an hour
after the first news of the vicinity of enemy ships before he increased
speed to 25 knots to engage ("at 3:30 P. M."[2]). Yet Vice Admiral
Beatty reports that Rear Admiral Evan-Thomas's fifth battle squadron
(the four Queen Elizabeths) was still 10,000 yards away when he made
this move to engage the enemy with his battle cruisers. This forces us
to the conclusion that Admiral Beatty thought his six battle cruisers
would be able to take care of the situation. His confidence is explained
by the fact that all previous sorties of the Germans had been made by
battle cruisers or small craft.
Both sides threw out screens of light cruisers, which clashed, and at
3:48 "the action commenced at a range of 18,500 yards, both sides
opening fire practically simultaneously."[3] The British battle cruisers
fought on a course curving to the southeast, and then on a straight
south-southeast course, and the five German battle cruisers fought them
on a parallel course, instead of edging away from the superior British
force. It is now easy to see that the trend of the action was absolutely
in the direction of the approaching main body of the German High Seas
Fleet, but this very naturally was not apparent at the time to Admiral
Beatty.
The first phase of the battle may properly be studied as a fight
between the British and German battle cruisers, in consequence of the
before-stated gap separating the two parts of Admiral Beatty's command.
This interval of 10,000 yards prevented the fifth battle squadron of
Queen Elizabeth dreadnoughts from being a factor at the time. Vice
Admiral Beatty reports that this squadron "opened fire at a range of
20,000 yards," and he continues: "The fifth battle squadron was engaging
the enemy's rear ships, unfortunately at very long range." (It is
interesting to note this comment on a range of 20,000 yards, in view of
the fantastic distances at which the Queen Elizabeth had been depicted
by alarmists as shelling our coast cities.)
In this part of the action came the first of the many upsets of pre-war
calculations. Comparing the given strength of the two opposing squadrons
in action, it will be seen that the British battle cruisers were greatly
superior; in fact, the odds would have been considered prohibitive
before this battle. Yet it was the British squadron that suffered,
losing one-third of its ships. Ten minutes after the beginning of the
action the Indefatigable was sunk, and at 4:30 the Queen Mary met the
same fate. In each case it is said that there was a great explosion up
through the turrets, suggesting that a weak turret construction is
really a conductor of fire to the magazine in case of a heavy hit, and
pointing to the need of better separation of the supply of ammunition
from the magazine.
DESTROYERS TAKE PART
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account