FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95  
96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   >>   >|  
ips were torpedoed. The _Marlborough_ was struck and badly damaged, but she made her way safely to port. The _Frauenlob_, _Rostock_, and _Pommern_ were sunk. And that is the whole story so far as known at present. Yet several hundred torpedoes must have been discharged, most of them at ranges within 5,000 yards. It looks a little as if the world would be obliged to modify the view that has been held of late with reference to the efficiency of the torpedo--or at least of the torpedo as carried by the destroyer. The loss of the three large battle cruisers, _Indefatigable_, _Invincible_, and _Queen Mary_ is, and will always remain, the most dramatic incident of the battle, and the most inexplicable. It is doubtful if we shall ever know the facts, but that something more than gunfire was involved is made clear by the fact that in each case the ship was destroyed by an explosion. Whether this was due to a shell actually penetrating the magazine, or to the ignition of exposed charges of powder, or to a torpedo or a mine exploding outside in the vicinity of the magazine, it is impossible to do more than conjecture. There is a suggestion of something known, but kept back, in the following paragraph from a description of the battle by Mr. Arthur Pollen, which is presumably based upon information furnished by the British admiralty: "As to the true explanation of the loss of the three ships that did blow up, the admiralty, no doubt, will give this to the public if it is thought wise to do so. But there can be no harm in saying this. The explanation of the sinking of each of these ships by a single lucky shot--both they and practically all the other cruisers were hit repeatedly by shots that did no harm--is, in the first place, identical. Next, it does not lie in the fact that the ships were insufficiently armored to keep out big shell. Next, the fatal explosion was not caused by a mine or by a torpedo. Lastly, it is in no sense due to any instability or any other dangerous characteristic of the propellants or explosives carried on board. I am free to confess that when I first heard of these ships going down as rapidly as they did, one of two conclusions seemed to be irresistible--either a shell had penetrated the lightly armored sides and burst in the magazine, or a mine or torpedo had exploded immediately beneath it. But neither explanation is right." One of the most striking and surprising features about the battle is
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95  
96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
torpedo
 

battle

 

explanation

 
magazine
 
cruisers
 
carried
 

admiralty

 

explosion

 

armored

 

repeatedly


practically
 
sinking
 

struck

 

Marlborough

 

torpedoed

 

British

 

information

 

furnished

 

single

 

public


thought
 

insufficiently

 

irresistible

 
penetrated
 

lightly

 
conclusions
 
rapidly
 

striking

 

surprising

 

features


exploded

 

immediately

 
beneath
 
caused
 

Lastly

 
identical
 

instability

 

confess

 

dangerous

 

characteristic


propellants

 

explosives

 
modify
 

Frauenlob

 
obliged
 
reference
 

efficiency

 

Indefatigable

 
Invincible
 

destroyer