The British battle fleet, Vol. 2 (of 2) : $b its inception and growth throughout the centuries to the present dayJane, Fred T. (Frederick Thomas)
History
The British battle fleet, Vol. 2 (of 2) : $b its inception and growth throughout the centuries to the present day
Jane, Fred T. (Frederick Thomas)
Great Britain -- History, Naval; Great Britain. Royal Navy -- History; Warships -- Great Britain -- History
Both the Babcock and Yarrow boilers have been immensely improved since
the days when they were first brought out. Something of the same sort
is, of course, true of all the standard types, and there is to-day
hardly any question as to which of them may be the best or worst. Each
type has some special advantage of its own, and in no case, probably,
is that advantage sufficiently pronounced to render any one type
absolutely the best. When adopted by the Admiralty the Belleville was
certainly the best water-tube boiler available. Had it been persisted
in and not “improved” by amateurs it would probably have done quite as
well as any type adopted to-day. The real issue was mainly not one of
type, but of principle. That principle was the water-tube boiler as
opposed to the old type cylindrical.
The Estimates for 1896–97 provided for five battleships which were
somewhat sarcastically alluded to as “improved” _Majestics_. These
ships were the _Canopus_ class, and they mark a species of early
striving after the ideal of the battle-cruisers of to-day. That is
to say, certain sacrifices were made in them with a view to securing
increased speed.
Particulars of these ships:--
Displacement--12,950 tons.
Length--(over all) 418ft.
Beam--74ft.
Draught--(maximum) 26½ft.
Armament--Four 12in., 35 cal., twelve 6in. 40 cal., ten
12-pounders, four submerged tubes (18in.)
Armour--Harvey-Nickel. Belt amidships 6in. with 2in. extension
to the bow and 1½in. skin aft on the water-line. Bulkheads and
barbettes 12in. Turrets 8in.
Horse-power--31,500 = 18.25 knots.
Coal--(normal) 1,000 tons; (maximum) 2,300 tons = nominal radius of
8,000 miles at 10 knots.
The adoption of Harvey-Nickel armour, which was of superior resisting
power to Harvey armour in the ratio of about 5 to 4, partly, but not
entirely accounted for the thinning of the armour of this class.
Theoretically, the 9in. armour belt of the _Majestic_ was equal to
18in. of iron, while the belt of the _Canopus_ class was equal to
about 15in. of iron. In place of the 4in. deck of the _Majestics_, the
_Canopus_ class had only a 2½in. deck. The thin bow (2in.) plating
was introduced as a sop to a public agitation against soft-ended
ships. Such a belt is, of course, perfectly useless against any heavy
projectile, or, for that matter, against 6in., except at very long
range indeed. Sir William White never made any secret of his cynical
disbelief in these bow belts. They were and always have been what
doctors call a “placebo.”
In the following year the sixth ship of this class was built--the
_Vengeance_. She differed from the others in the form of her turrets,
which were flat sided for the first time. In her also a mounting was
first introduced, whereby, in addition to being loaded in any position,
big guns could also be loaded at any elevation.
Some other details of the _Canopus_ class are:--
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account