New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-06-29
TE4E LETIATHIN Ms.

The Victoria disaster will inevitably have
an Important bearing upon the future OF naval
construction. Until the details are received
in official form and the causes OF the sud
den overturn of the ship are explained DIS
cussion of expert theories is unp'ofi'ablc.
Whether the mlnocuvres were rendered dan
ccrous by new code of signalling or whether
the disaster was caused by an inexp!icable col
lapse Of steering gclr or machinery, the str'ct-
ura weakness Of one batteship and the ire
mondously destructive energy OF the others ram
are facts which do not require demonstration.
The modern battle-hp is shown by this cataS-
trophc 70 be at once weaker in defensive re-
sources ard stronger in offensive power than
naval designers have supposed.
In the deliberations of experts at almost
every recent stage of the progress OF naval
architecture the first pace has been accorded
IN the question of armor BattlcShps have
been built mainly with n view to rendering
them floating targets capable of withstanding
thc heaviest gun fire. Provided with an armor
belt of great thickness for the defence OF ma
chincry. they have been converted into floating
fotrcSsrs with imprcgnablc re1oubts fer artil-
cry Of the highest power. While there nave
been two characteristic types OF batileship, the
furrct ship with low or moderate frceboard AZ
the end, and the barbcttc ship with greater
frccbcarI and guns carried higher above water,
il has been imprs.ble in either ease to adjust
the weight, of armor machinery and guns so
n (, avoid "top-hcavinc>S" and 10 afford pro-
lection below tho water line With solid
steel belt capable Of resisting the impact OF
shot from / o-ton guns, the Victoria, like every
other hatilcship, was vulnerable below the
armorCd line and unprcpared for the onset OF
ram or submarine torpedo. The longitudinal
comuartmcnts were filled with water as soon
A. the great rent was made in her side; an
enormous weight was added to that OF guns
and armor and il was on one side Of the ship
tho centre of gravity was changed, and the
great battlcship turned turtle and went down
bottom up. That is as ineligible an account
of the disaster ~ can be furnished from the
dispatches. II unoringly indicates that the
most powerful vessel of war is structurally weak
when struck below the belt.
If rlmming alone could make the rent in the
ships side by which the Victoria was instantly
disabled and DESTROYED, there would be less
cause fer dsmay among naval experts. What
happened in familiar manocuvre when the
ships were changing column could not be re-
poate1 in naval engagement without great
risk 10 the iamming ship. If the Campcrdown
had been an enemy. bearing down for deadly
conflict nj close quarters. the Victoria could
have beaten her back with heavy fire. or she
could have outmanocuvrel her and mcnacod
the asSailant with counferattack from her own
ram. BatleShips. 50 long they have guns to
serve and machinery in running order, can be
expected to protect themselves against one an
other: but they are exposed to other sources
of danger. The unprotected ships side below
the armor belt cannot resist the sudden impact
Of the torpedo. \ rent made in that quarter
by the sting of one OF these wasps would incv-
tably have sant any levathan Of the Mcditcr-
ianoan feet to tho bottom. Admiral Ammcn
is probably right when he asserts that the ac-
cidcnt ut Malta last spring, when torpedo boat
ran into the battleshp Nile, was hardly less
significant than the Victoria disaster.