Brownsville herald. [volume] (Brownsville, Tex.) 1910-current, 1914-12-01
BRING
NO CHANGES IN
SHIP DEFENSE
American Navy Officers Have Been Critic
ally Observing Destructive Work OF Tor
pedoes and Mines, But no Construction
Changes are Yet Offered.
PROBLEMS HAVE BEEN STUDIED
SINCE RUSSlAN-JAPANESE WAR
Many Proposals Have Been Discussed.
Some Adopted; However, The Theory OF
Warship Building Still CIings to Big
Guns, Larger and Swifter Ships.

w
Washington. ID. g.. Dee. l.-While
American Navy officers have watched with
critical eyes the deadly work of iropedoes
fired from submarine and, Of contact
mines IN the European war. nothing ha~ de
veloped ~ yet which indicates any radical
change IN battlc~hip construction to offer
greater defense against Underwater at
ltackS.
The problems presented are not new.
They have been stabbed hy naval construc-
tors of every power since the Russian Jap
ansc war when many fine -hip- fell We
tim To mines and torpcdoes. Proposals Of
many sorts have been discussed. Some
have been adopted but the theory Of war
ship building still cilngs TO concentration
of offensive power intcrm~ Of larger guns,
bigger and ~wiltcr ships and wider cruising
radius, even AT the expense of defensive
armor.
The heavy losses sustained by the
British navy by submarine attacks has
brought mp for renewed discussion the sub
iect Of armoring the bottoms Of war craft.
Recent issues of English service journals
have noted 4 plan ~ cover the entire bot
tom of a battleship with four inches Of
armor plating. IL was urged that the cx-
pertinent BE- tried with IN old ship which
should be subjected to actual test with the
explosion against her hull of the most pow
erful Of modern torpedocs. The ship also
would be driven into contact mines of va
rious types to determine their effect. il was
said.
American naval experts berieve there J.
little doubt Of the result. They Say -four
inches of armor would resist any known
torpedo or mine successfully. To equip n
ship in that way. however. the enormous
weight of the armor would require a re-
duction in weight elsewhere and the only
way Il could bc accomplished would be- g.
reduce the size and number ct guns. the
thickness If surface arnor. the weight ~
engines aud coal capacity and because Of
this last. the size of the ships themselves.
With armorcd bottoms hattle~hipS would
become slow, heavy vessels of small cruis-
iug radius and their usefulness n instru-
mcntS with which t. strike swift. terrible
ultN = at ui~iailt fffiiii~ W'lhIt NOih VI tIfii
coming had gone out. would vanish. CuiS-
erS and swift merchant vessels would take
care only 20 keep out Of range of their
guns. The terrific power Of the modern
drradnaught would b. a thing Of the past.
Ii j. not impossible, however. that some
degree OF protection fo. the bottoms Of
hattie craft will be considered in future.
Heretofore constructors have relied al
most wholly upon increasing numbers Of
watertight compartments 10 keep torpedued
ships afloat. The loss of the English bat
tle~hip AudaciouS, one of the most modern
fighting machines ia the world. has she'd
new light ON the subject. Details of that
disaster are lacking but many believe the
Audaciou~ ran INTO a mime which sent her
L. the bottom. Her compartments kept her
%ailoat until her crew was rescued but one
by one they gave way under the mcreaS-
ing pressure of the water and finally she
went down.
Navy officers are unwilling n yet to pre-
diet what effect on naval construction that
viii have: They say il j. r question "
balance between offenSe and defense in bat
.tlc~hip construction and the old axiom that
the greatest defense lie- III the highest ca
lpacIty for offensive work still holds good.
II appears certain. however. that in plan
ming new ships. the subject of arm ,rcd
bottom, or az least partial armor fef the
mld~hipS section If the bottom. will u,
carefully weighed.