Reply to post: Re: Return of the Battleships?

Brit semiconductor tech ended up in Chinese naval railgun – report

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Return of the Battleships?

Also, Beatty was very casual about target practice. His battlecruisers often missed the enemy by more than a mile (usually "over"). In contrast, the 5th battleship squadron - the new "Queen Elizabeth" class - were extremely accurate at similar or even greater ranges.

Practice makes perfect, and counts for a lot more than elan or fighting spirit. The same syndrome repeated itself with the destruction of HMS "Hood"; the German gunners got the range immediately and scored several hits, one of which was fatal. The death blow may even have been dealt by the heavy cruiser "Prinz Eugen", as even its 8-inch shells could have penetrated Hood's inadequate armour. It would be the supreme irony if "Hood", the biggest example ever built of Jackie Fisher's battlecruiser concept, was sunk by a heavy cruiser - precisely the type of ship the battlecruiser was designed to hunt down and destroy.

An 8-inch shell that hits is a lot more effective than a whole salvo of 15-inch shells that all miss.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon