Talk:HMS Victoria (1887)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, an attempt to improve coverage of shipwreck-related topics. See also the parent WikiProject, WikiProject Disaster Management. If you plan to work on this article for an extended period of time, please indicate what you are doing on the Project's talk page. |
| NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritising and managing its workload. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale. |
|
Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:
|
|
A very interesting and well written article. However, as a landlubber myself, I don't understand why a 90 degree turn is more dangerous and requires more space than a 180 degree turn (this seems counter intuitive to me!). Would it be possible to include a diagram showing how this incident occurred? twitter 13:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
The 90-degree turn was a tactical maneuver that realigned two parallel columns into a single battle line. The lead ship in each column would simultaneously turn 90 degrees (to port, for example). As each pair of ships in the two lines reached their respective turning points, they too would simultaneously execute the same 90-degree turn. In the meantime, however, the lead ship of the starboard column would be bearing down on the turning point of the port column. Therefore, the columns had to be far enough apart so that all the ships in the port column could execute the turn before being rammed by the lead ship in the starboard column. If the columns were properly spaced, then the lead ship of the starboard column would automatically be in the correct position behind the last ship of the port column, creating a single line. TDJ 15:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Ah now I understand. Thanks very much. twitter 14:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
