NOTES ON THE ARMAMENTS OF BATTLESHIPS. 3 



will probably be fought at longer ranges than have been adopted in the 

 past. The main reasons for this increase in fighting range are to be found, 

 on one side, in the development of locomotive torpedoes and the increase 

 of their speed, accuracy, and effective range; while on the other side stand 

 no less important improvements in naval gunnery — including guns, pro- 

 pellants, projectiles, explosives, range-finders, sights and means of control. 

 Nor can there be any dispute as to the fact that increase in gun-caliber in 

 association with a constant miizzle velocity secures greater flatness of 

 trajectory, and greater accuracy of fire, as well as superior maintenance of 

 energy at long ranges. But when general statements of this nature are 

 closely examined, differences of opinion on practical matters are found to 

 exist among men equally entitled to a respectful hearing, and these 

 dift'erences sensibly influence their choice of armaments. 



LONG FIGHTING RANGE AND SECONDARY ARMAMENTS. 



In regard to the probable fighting range for future naval actions there 

 are marked differences of opinion. While all agree that it is likely to be 

 greater than heretofore, two distinct schools of thought exist as to the 

 minimum range likely to occur in practise. One of these asserts that an 

 extremely long range will be chosen and maintained by commanders whose 

 fleets possess greater speed and whose ships- are armed on the "single- 

 caliber, big-gun" principle; and it is argued that at this great range vessels 

 so armed will be able speedily to put out of action an enemy's ships which 

 individually carry fewer big guns, although these may also possess powerful 

 and well-protected secondary armaments. These secondary armaments, 

 it is urged, would be of no practical service at very long range; because 

 of an alleged inferior accuracy (due to more curved trajectories traversed 

 by tlieir relatively small and light projectiles), their proportionately grc^ater 

 loss of energy as ranges increase, and their presumed ineffectiveness because 

 of their lack of power to peneti"ate armor of moderate thickness, their 

 alleged less proportion of hits to rounds fired, and the small bursting charges 

 carried by their shells. 



The other school maintains that, although actions may be begun at 

 very long ranges on occasions when atmospheric conditions are favorable, 

 average conditions of weather at sea will not favor that kind of attack 

 nor make its results decisive. They give reasons for the belief that when 

 an issue is joined, with the full intention to reach a decisive finish, it is 

 practically certain that closer ranges will be reached ; and they insist that 

 the choice of armaments ought not to be governed by a set of assumptions 



