Modern ships of warReed, Edward J. (Edward James), Sir
History
Modern ships of war
Reed, Edward J. (Edward James), Sir
Navies; Warships
error to limit criticism to the longitudinal extent of the belt
armor in modern ships, and to exclude consideration of the vertical
extent of the armor above and below the load-line. Apart from any
discussion of the question from the artillerist’s point of view,
or any attempt to determine the probability or otherwise of the
wholesale destruction of the unarmored portions of modern battle
ships by shell-fire from large guns, or by the projectiles from
rapid-firing and machine guns, it is perfectly obvious to any one
who will examine into the matter that the risk of damage to the
light superstructures situated above the belt must be greater than
the corresponding risk of damage to the narrow strips of side area
exposed at the unarmored ends of the _Admiral_ class, between the
level of the belt-deck and the water-line.
“Sir Spencer Robinson, after his inspection of the models shown
him at the Admiralty, recognizes the fact that in the French
belted ships (of which the _Amiral Duperré_ is an example), if the
light sides above the belt-deck are destroyed or very seriously
riddled in action, the ship would be capsized in a very moderate
sea-way. He further emphasizes the statement that the ships of
the _Admiral_ class in the English navy, if similarly treated,
would also capsize under the same conditions, and he appears to
be surprised at the admission having been made. The fact is that
there has never been any assertion that the _Admiral_ class would
be safe against capsizing independently of assistance given to the
armor-belted portions by the unarmored structure situated above.
On the contrary, from the first, in the design of these ships, it
was recognized that their stability, in the sense of their power
to resist being capsized, if inclined to even moderate angles of
inclination, was not guaranteed by the armor-belts. In this respect
they were in identically the same position as all other armored
ships with shallow water-line belts and isolated armored batteries
placed high above water.
“What has been said respecting the _Admiral_ class is this: If the
unarmored ends above the protective deck were completely thrown
open to the sea, then the initial stability (that is to say, the
stiffness of the ships or their power to resist small inclinations
from the upright) would still be guaranteed by the central armored
portions. So fully did we appreciate the fact that the life of
the ship in action (as determined by her power to resist large
inclinations) depends greatly upon the assistance given by the
unarmored superstructures to the armor-belted parts, that we were
careful to make the structural arrangements of the superstructures
above the belts such that they could bear a very considerable
amount of riddling and damage from shot and shell without ceasing
to contribute in the most important degree to the buoyancy and
stability.
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