This is coolbert:
Here begins a serial of blog entries, extracts from the magazine: "Submarines Since 1919" and my pertinent comments.
Losses!!
"The British Empire, having started the war as the world's largest ship-owner and operator, lost over 9 million tons, as against 4 million tons lost by all other countries put together. This represented almost 90 per cent of the steamships under British registration in 1914, and the loss of national wealth went far beyond the actual cost of the cargoes."
* We need to differentiate between tonnage and absolute numbers of vessels? Tonnage refers to either the carrying capacity OR the weight of the vessel itself. A devoted reader to the blog who is a naval expert can explain?
* The British Empire at that exact moment needing a merchant marine of extraordinary size, the very existence of the Empire reliant on trans-oceanic trade, movement from continent to continent of raw materials and finished good, AND FOOD, all by ship! At any given moment, literally thousands of merchant vessels with English registry sailed to and fro, carrying goods among the various colonies, the Dominions, the home islands!
* The British in 1914, an Empire HIGHLY DEPENDENT on sea power, having losses in merchant shipping more than twice as great as all other nations put together, tonnage [the ability of a vessel to carry freight?] and in absolute numbers of ships losses both catastrophic.
* ALMOST ALL of those ships sunk - - the vast preponderance - - torpedoed or sank by naval gunfire from a submarine. The submarine prior to the war NOT seen as being a major player - - a minor adjunct to naval warfare at that - - NOT taken so seriously!
* 90 % of those merchant vessels available to the British at the start of the war - - sunk to the bottom during the four years of warfare? NO ONE ever expected the Great War [WW1] in 1914 to last but for a few months maximum. These losses were totally unanticipated and caused great consternation among those in command at the Admiralty. Again - - an unanticipated and most troubling development for which at first there was no good answer.
* Add to the cost of the war the building of merchant vessels to replace those lost to submarine warfare. Once more, an unanticipated cost - - ships, crews, cargoes, etc., a necessity for the English, Empire and the war effort all requiring sea power [that combination of naval combat might and a merchant marine] VITAL to survival just of itself!!
War is bad for the economy!
The submarine in 1914 NOT taken seriously but by 1918 taken very seriously, and with good reason!
coolbert.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment