This page needs to be proofread.
SHIP AND SHIPBUILDING
427


but the growth in displacement necessitated a corresponding increase in power to attain the requisite speed. The use of oil fuel in association with coal was maintained until the " Queen Eliza- beth " class was reached, when the greater advantages of oil fuel and the improved methods of its combustion finally caused the abandonment of coal as fuel. A noteworthy feature of these remarkable vessels was the advance in speed to 25 knots, necessi- tating, on a slightly larger displacement than that of their pred- ecessors, an increase of about 150% in the power.

Concurrently with the development of the battleship proper, that of the British battle cruiser may be followed with advantage. Up to the inception of the " Dreadnought " design nothing more ambitious than an armament consisting of g-2-in. guns associated with 7'5-in. guns ("Warrior" and "Minotaur," 1903-4) had been attempted in armoured cruisers. But the same reasons which caused the evolution of the all-big-gun battleships from the mixed armament of the " King Edward VII." and " Lord Nelson " classes now called for a similar simplification in the armoured cruiser designs. The outcome of this policy was the production of the " Invincible " class of " cruiser battleships," now generally known as " battle cruisers."

In these vessels the additional power necessary for their 4 to 5 knots superiority of speed over the " Dreadnought " was obtained at the sacrifice of two i2-ih. guns and some loss of armour pro- tection. The value of speed, which in battleships had always been a debatable point, was, of course, incontestable for the battle cruisers, and the development of the type has, both before and since the outbreak of the war, kept pace with the insistent demands of the strategist for the highest speed obtainable. With- in the lo-year period referred to above, the increase in speed and power from the "Invincible" (25 knots for 41,000 H.P.) to the "Renown" (32 knots for 120,000 H.P.) required an increase in displacement from 17,250 tons to 26,500 tons, the relative increase in power being over 190 per cent. Finally in the " Hood " a speed of 32 knots with 144,000 H.P. on a displacement of 41,200 tons, an increase of 235% in power was involved.

The wisdom of the policy which initiated this new era in naval construction, relegating temporarily into the background the former British supremacy in capital ships, was naturally the sub- ject of much criticism. But evolution in warship construction is not the property of any one navy, and there is little doubt that, at the conclusion of the Japanese war, the world stood on the threshold of a new era in naval architecture. If British naval supremacy was to be maintained it had to be done by leading the world along the new path of warship design, without waiting for others to utilize the advantages that had been rendered possible by progress in armour, guns and machinery. How great an advance the " Dreadnought " represented on previous ships may be gauged from the particulars given in Table I.

TABLE I. Comparison between " Dreadnought " and the Best Previous Skips.


" Dread- nought " (as de- signed)

Best Pre- vious Ship

Number of 12-in. guns carried.

10

4

Length of line of battle for equal num-


ber of 12-in. guns on the broadside

Ratio

I tO 2

Total muzzle energy per broadside of

,

,

12-in. guns Length of line of battle for equal 12-in.

\ft.-tonsj

J I45,OOO

\ft.-tons

' broadside gun power ....

Ratio

I to 2-6

Tons displacement per 12-in. gun .

1,785

3-750

First cost per 12-in. gun in line of battle.

175,000

280,000

Annual upkeep of ship per 12-in. gun car-


ried. 1

34,800

62,300

Speed (knots)

21

19

Endurance :


At economical speed (nautical m.)

5,800

5,790

At 16 knots (nautical m.)

4,000

3,000

Other navies were not slow to follow the lead given by Great

1 This includes pay, victualling, repairs, coal, stores, etc., together with an addition of 15% per annum of first cost, for interest and depreciation, etc

Britain. The veil of secrecy in which the new types were closely shrouded whetted the emulation as well as the curiosity of other nations. Germany, ever ready to reap where others have sown, set about preparing for the change, and two years later produced the "Nassau" class, with 12 n-in. guns as main armament and 12 6-in. guns as anti-destroyer armament. At the rate of three a year She continued to lay down ships of this type improved in armament as time progressed each batch being accompanied by a battle cruiser of corresponding power and speed. Other nations fell into step, and, during the five or six years preceding the outbreak of war, produced, with variants appropriate to their several necessities, all-big-gun ships carrying a main armament of 10 or 12 primary weapons grouped in turrets shielding two, three, or even four guns each.

While the German output of capital ships had, once it got under way, continued with methodical regularity, British naval construction had suffered from the vagaries inseparable from divergent political views and aspirations.

Under the " Cawdor Memorandum " of Nov. 30 1905 it had been laid down that the minimum British requirements would be four large armoured ships a year, and the " Dreadnought " with the three " Invincibles " fulfilled this condition, but in each of the two following years only three battleships (and no battle cruisers) were laid down, while the 1908-9 programme only pro- vided for one battleship (" Neptune ") and one armoured cruiser (" Indefatigable "). Efforts had been made to induce Germany to curtail her naval expansion " a year's holiday in naval con- struction " being suggested but such hopes as were based on this contingency gradually faded before the inexorable German determination to challenge British sea supremacy. In the 1909- 10 estimates provision was therefore made for laying down four capital ships, two in July 1009 (" Colossus " and " Hercules ") and two in Nov. (" Orion " and " Lion "), while four " contin- gent " ships (" Monarch," " Thunderer," " Conqueror " and " Princess Royal ") were to be laid down in April 1910, if the German menace showed no signs of abating. So far from this latter being the case, there was an acceleration in the dates of laying down the .German ships, and the programme outlined above was therefore punctually carried out. The 1909-10 programme, it will be seen, was a memorable one in the history of British naval construction, and its adoption enabled Great Britain to maintain her naval supremacy, which otherwise would have been jeopardized.

Notwithstanding the atmosphere of uncertainty created by the delays due to hopes of a reduction of armaments, the rate of progress on warships under construction was well maintained, and, with a few exceptions, Great Britain was able to complete the largest battleships within 24 to 30 months of laying down, a performance which compared favourably with the best achieve- ments abroad, and which not even Germany with her methodical preparations was able to equal.

The disposition of the heavy guns in both battleships and battle cruisers had, during the first five years of this period, undergone several important modifications. In the " Dreadnought," " Bellero- phon " and " St. Vincent " classes the five two-gun turrets were placed as in the diagram : A being on the forecastle deck, the re- maining turrets on the upper deck, giving eight guns on each broad- side, six ahead and six astern.


The " Invincibles," which carried one turret (X) less, had the two middle turrets P and Q disposed en echelon, and the superstructure amidships was so arranged as to enable all eight guns to fire on either broadside. The middle turrets were, however, placed so near to one another that serious trouble was experienced from gun blast when firing across the deck. In the battle cruisers of the " Indefatig- able " class, and the battleships of the " Neptune " and " Colossus " classes, therefore, where a similar arrangement was adopted, the centre pair of turrets were spaced wider apart. A further change in the arrangement of turrets was adopted for the first time in these