ATP
Well worn.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2020
- Messages
- 5,267
- Likes received
- 10,240
This is what I would argue is more important than shell failure rate, that and doctrine. The Japanese had by this point had already adopted their version of Mahan and knew they they were going into a close range knife fight. The Beiyang fleet did not, they did not have that doctrine the Japanese were fully prepared to take serious losses by closing but were aiming for a knock out fight (this is descisive battle theory)
This goes to Japan is an island nation with the Navy as the primary military service the Royal Navy is providing advice, there are adivsors there are observerers aboard Japanese ships (just as there will be in the Russo Japanese war) and these are ships either constructed at British yards or with British engineers assisting while it is not perfect it allows a much more effective integration of modern doctrine as well as what the Japanese fleet of the day had in terms of real resources.
Fun thing - China doctrine/2 big battleships and many weak cruisers with few old torpedo boats/
was result of their defeat in 1884.against French - when french used their own torpedo boats to sunk
chineese cruisers - becouse they had only big,slow loading guns,unable to hit torpedo boats.
French cruisers come and finished what left.
So,China decide that 2 strong battleships with escort against torpedo boats would win the day.And they almost win - japaneese was unable to seriusly hurt them,but sunked almost all other ships.
If China cruisers lasted long,or at least most of battleships schells were not duds,it would be draw or even China victory.
Back to story - remember about spanish flu,it killed at least as many people in China as in Europe.