The Imperial Japanese Navy

by Fred T. Jane

There is some doubt about the Asahi’s coal, 1400 tons may be the maximum and 700 the normal. Japanese ships do not need to carry much coal, being designed to operate in waters where friendly coal stations are numerous. True, ships thus kept short are likely to be out of action because they are coaling, about once a week; but, on the other hand, as they get two extra 6-in. quickfirers and four 12-pounders for this sacrifice, they are rather envied by our naval officers. After all, the primary duty of a battleship is to hit the enemy hard, and an extra 6-in. in the broadside is no mean advantage. There are other incidental advantages too—a single 6-in. shell would put all the eight 12-pounders out of action on the upper deck of the Formidable, while, thanks to the casemates acting as screens, the Asahi could only lose four of her 3-in. by a single shell. In the placing of her 3-in. guns she is altogether better off than the Formidable, the sole point in which the British ship is superior being the four guns carried on the main deck forward. The Formidable can fight all these on the broadsides; it is doubtful if the Asahi could, because of the blast from the big guns firing above them. But per contra she has her other 3-in. quickfirers much better placed; they are more distributed.

The positions of these are: four on the main deck forward; four on the main deck aft; four on the upper deck amidships; two on top of the forward upper deck casemates; two beside the fore conning-tower; and four beside the after conning-tower—a total of twenty. Those of the Shikishima are placed in exactly the same fashion. Those of the Formidable are: four on main deck forward (extreme bow); four on main deck aft; and eight on upper deck amidships; a total of sixteen. Three units instead of six; or, to put it another way, work for only three shells instead of six shells.

The Asahi is an improvement on the Shikishima in the matter of the 2½-pounders—a very small detail. In the Shikishima these are grouped on top of the amidship upper-deck casemates; in the Asahi only two are over these casemates, the other four being distributed, a couple on each bridge. Two theories are at work here, and it will need a war to say which is the better. In the Shikishima it is easy to concentrate three 2½-pounders on a single torpedo boat or portion of a big enemy, while, as a price for this, they are at the mercy of a single shell. Those of the Asahi are not thus at the mercy of one shell, but it will be far less easy to concentrate them.

The next point of difference between the Shikishima and the Asahi is that the former carries a bow above-water torpedo tube, with 6-in. Harvey nickel protection to it. This tube, similarly protected, is in the Fuji, Yashima, Asama, Tokiwa, and Yakumo. After some experiments and practice the Japanese authorities decided that this tube was of no use practically, and decreed its abolition. That of the Shikishima had, however, already been built in, so this ship has it. In the Asahi the design was modified, and the bow tube dropped out. It is absent also in the Hatsuse, a sister, and in the Iwate and Idzumo.

Under certain circumstances such a tube might be of great use in action—for instance, approaching an enemy who presented his broadside while the ship possessing the tube wished to make a feint to close. But to use it it would be necessary to slow down or reverse engines—both things that might be awkward to do in an action. Still, the real objection does not lie there, so much as in the trouble with sea that a bow tube causes. Bow guns, even high up, are always liable to get “washed out,” a bow torpedo tube is still more likely to be so. In addition to this, it raises an unnecessary large bow wave.

In comparison with the Formidable, the Asahi and Shikishima have—beside the 6-in. and 3-in. guns—other points of distinct difference. They have (1) complete instead of partial belts; (2) 6-in. instead of 9-in. armour protecting the lower deck; (3) much higher barbettes; and (4) quite differently shaped hoods to the big guns.

Of these differences the armour one is of no immediate moment at present. The Asahi, in the matter of armour, is practically a Majestic with 3-in. stripped off the lower deck amidships and disposed on the ends plus some extra armour paid for in the weight of coal carried. Now, the 6-in. lower deck armour of the Asahi is proof against any 6-in. projectile at any range, and though a steel-pointed 9.2-in. common shell has been through 6-in. Harvey nickel at Whale Island, this is probably an isolated proving-ground case, and nothing but an armour-piercing shell of large calibre is ever likely to get through such armour in actual warfare. Also it is at least doubtful whether such a shell would do more harm than a solid shot, and against a 12-in. solid shot 9-in. armour is no more protection than 6-in. In either case the shot will go through and dance about inside, and it is this “dancing about” that makes shot dangerous, and all armour save the very best a snare and a delusion so far as solid projectiles are concerned. However, medium armour is imperatively needed to keep off shells, for it is good-bye to any ship inside of which a big common shell is comfortably planted. The Admiral class, for instance, would do no more fighting once a big common shell got them amidships.

[Photo, West.