Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wasatch!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!att!cbnews!henry@zoo.toronto.edu
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Ship armor
Message-ID: <6031@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 28 Apr 89 03:24:09 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Lines: 19
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
>In the battle of Jutland (WWI's decisive naval battle), 3 British
>battlecruiser (Invincible, Indefatigable, and Queen Mary) received hits
>from their German counterparts (Lutzow, Derfflinger, Von der Tann, and
>Seydlitz) and blew up with massive loss of life.  The German ships fared
>better...
>Events clearly indicated that speed did not make up for protection.

In fairness, there were complicating factors at Jutland that make a fully
unbiased comparison difficult.  In particular, the propellant compositions
differed, and this had important effects:  German "powder" burned viciously
when ignited, and tended to wipe out turret crews, but the British stuff
exploded and destroyed entire ships.  Switch propellant compositions and
the results might have been more even.

                                     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
                                 uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu