Talk:Nelson/@comment-35703536-20180912163448/@comment-47.198.25.132-20180913024044

Also, where'd you get the idea that above the waterline hits were less effective at sinking ships? Numerous British capital ships were sunk by turret and deck penetrations at the Battle of Jutland, which specifically called out the weak horizontal protection of most battleships of the era, resulting in the "Treaty Battleships" of the 30s having more than double the deck armor of their WW1 contemporaries. Hood was also sunk by a deck penetration that detonated her rear magazines, although it is also possible that the shell penetrated her upper armor belt, which is also above the waterline. One of Massachusetts' shells penetrated one the French Battleship Jean Bart's magazines through the deck, although the magazine was mercifully empty due to her unfinished state, though it still put her out of action. Deck penetrations were very effective at sinking ships, which is why newer warships had such hugely increased deck armor to try and protect against plunging fire and aircraft bombs. Did I mention that aircraft bombs were also effective at sinking ships? Aircraft were one of the biggest concerns among the all of the major naval power of the time.