Records, by Admiral of the Fleet, Lord FisherFisher, John Arbuthnot Fisher, Baron
History
Records, by Admiral of the Fleet, Lord Fisher
Fisher, John Arbuthnot Fisher, Baron
Admirals -- Great Britain -- Biography; Fisher, John Arbuthnot Fisher, Baron, 1841-1920; Great Britain. Royal Navy
First of all Admiral Bacon disposed of the fallacy brought forward by
one of the speakers, as to which is more effective in disabling the
enemy, to destroy the structure of the ship or destroy the guns--the
fact being that both are bound up together--if you utterly destroy the
hull of the ship you thereby practically destroy the gun-fire. (This
is one of those things so obvious that one greatly wonders how these
clever experts lose themselves.)
Then Admiral Bacon in a most lovely parable disposed of the “Bow and
Arrow Party,” who want a lot of small guns instead of, as in the
Dreadnought, but one type of gun and that the heaviest gun that can be
made. This is Admiral Bacon:--
“I should like to draw your attention to some advice that was
given many years ago by an old Post Captain to a Midshipman.
He said, ‘Boy, if ever you are dining and after dinner, over
the wine, some subject like politics is discussed when men’s
passions are aroused, if a man throws a glass of wine in your
face, do not throw a glass of wine in his: _Throw the decanter
stopper!_’ And that is what we advocates of the Heavy Gun as
mounted in the Dreadnought propose to do--not to slop the
six-inch shot over the shirt-front of a battleship, but to go
for her with the heaviest guns we can get; and the heavier
the explosive charge you can get in your shell and the bigger
explosion you can wreak on the structure near the turrets and
the conning tower and over the armoured deck the more likely
you are to disable that ship. We object most strongly to the
fire of the big guns being interfered with by the use of
smaller guns at the same time with all the smoke and mess that
are engendered by them. The attention of the Observing Officers
is distracted; their sight is to a great extent obliterated,
and even the theoretical result of the small guns is not worth
the candle.... The ordinary six-inch gun in a battleship is,
as regards torpedo-boat attack, of just as much use as a stick
is to an old gentleman who is being snow-balled: it keeps his
enemy at a respectful distance but still within the vulnerable
range of the torpedo. In these days the locomotive torpedo
can be fired at ranges at which it is absolutely impossible
even to hope or think of hitting the Destroyer which fires
the torpedoes at you. You may try to do it, but it is quite
useless. Very well, then; the six-inch gun does keep the
Destroyer at a longer range than would be the case if the
six-inch gun were not there, that’s all.... Then the problem
of speed has been touched upon. I quite see from one point of
view that to lose two guns for an extra five-knot speed seems
a great loss; but there is one question which I should like
to ask, and that is whether you would send out to sea a whole
fleet, the whole strength of the nation, with no single ship of
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