![]() ![]() Perhaps most notably though, care must be taken when assessing the true value of the French vessels’ armour protection. It should also be stated that she was not an unqualified success, missing her design speed by more than a knot and being extraordinarily unhandy, with a miserable 2,200yrd tactical (turning) diameter.115 In comparison, the Diadems, of similar displacement, had a tactical diameter of some 1,000yrds for which relative unhandiness compared to other British first-class cruisers they were regularly criticised. ![]() The Jeanne d’Arc, with her face-hardened armour, was a significant advance over previous French cruisers, although in a broad sense the massive jump in dimensions was as much responsible for the increased capabilities as the production processes of her belt material. In terms of overall principle or objective this is a reasonably accurate statement, though there are certain significant caveats regarding the execution that are overlooked. But the most remarkable feature of this warship was the provision of an armoured belt along the complete length of the hull… this meant that the hull of the Jeanne d’Arc, and all subsequent French side-armoured cruisers, was virtually shot-proof against the armour-piercing shells fired from the 6-inch guns that composed the main batteries of the British cruisers with the speed to catch them. In theory the great length of the hull coupled with a huge coal capacity would enable her to outpace and outdistance any more powerful adversary. Generally held as the first of a new breed of first-class cruisers, she was supposedly a large, high-speed, long-range, armoured cruiser that was purposefully designed for raiding commerce on the high seas. The most notable early fruit of this shift in strategic direction back toward the guerre industrielle was the laying down of the Jeanne d’Arc in October 1896. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |