FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   >>   >|  
the intention of attacking with torpedoes, but was sunk by gunfire before she could achieve her object. The enemy vessels then attacked the convoy, sinking all except the British and Belgian vessels, which escaped undamaged. The _Strongbow_, shelled at close range, returned the fire, using guns and torpedoes, but was completely overwhelmed by the guns of the light cruisers and sank at about 9.30 A.M. The trawler _Elsie_ effected very fine rescue work amongst the survivors both from the _Strongbow_ and ships of the convoy, whilst under fire, and both trawlers reached Lerwick. The enemy sheered off soon after 8.0 A.M. Most unfortunately neither the _Strongbow_ nor the _Mary Rose_ succeeded in getting a wireless signal through to our own vessels to report the presence of enemy ships, otherwise there can be little doubt that they would have been intercepted and sunk. We had in the North Sea, during the night before the attack and during the day of the attack, a particularly strong force of light cruisers comprising four or possibly five squadrons (a total of not less than sixteen vessels), all to the southward of the convoy route, and had the information of the attack come through from the destroyers, these vessels would have been informed at once and would have had an excellent chance of intercepting the enemy. The extreme difficulty of preventing the egress of raiders from the North Sea at night, even when so large a force is cruising, was well illustrated by this incident, although a little reflection on the wide area of water to be covered, together with a knowledge of the distance that the eye can cover on a dark night (some 200 to 300 yards), would show how very great are the chances in favour of evasion. This disaster to the Scandinavian convoy was bound to bring into prominence the question of affording to it protection against future attacks by surface vessels, for necessarily the protection against surface vessels differed from that against submarines, a point which was sometimes overlooked by those who were unfamiliar with the demands of the two wars which were being waged--the one on the surface and the other under the surface. It was very difficult to furnish efficient protection against the surface form of attack from the resources of the Grand Fleet if the practice of running a daily convoy was continued, because it was impossible to forecast the strength or exact character--battle-cruisers, cruisers or destr
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
vessels
 
convoy
 
surface
 
cruisers
 

attack

 

Strongbow

 

protection

 

torpedoes

 

chances

 

Scandinavian


battle

 

disaster

 

favour

 

evasion

 

distance

 

cruising

 

illustrated

 
raiders
 
incident
 

covered


knowledge

 

reflection

 
gunfire
 

question

 

furnish

 

efficient

 
resources
 

difficult

 

continued

 
impossible

running

 
practice
 

strength

 

attacks

 
attacking
 

necessarily

 

future

 

egress

 

forecast

 

affording


character

 
differed
 
submarines
 

intention

 

unfamiliar

 

demands

 

overlooked

 

prominence

 

intercepting

 
succeeded