Talk:HMS Incomparable
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 September 2018. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the HMS Incomparable article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
.svg)
 | A fact from HMS Incomparable appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 February 2008, and was viewed approximately 9,600 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
November 2009 edit
Some statements here seem incorrect/unlikely: - 24ft draft may well be what is quoted but this must be an incorrect figure, an outlandish design this may be but the Admiralty's designers would well know that this wouldn't work, the ship would not be structurally workable. Also the quoted displacement could not be realised on 24ft of draft, assuming a hull form akin to HMS Hood, ~30-32ft would be needed. - 4" deck armour, though poor by capital ship standards, is more than enough against light cruiser guns of ~6" calibre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.73.9 (talk) 15:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- Fisher was obsessed with a scheme to operate in the Baltic. Because of the shallowness of that sea, a maximum draft of 24 was the most that could be used for ships intended for operation there.
- A proposal for an HMS Incomparable was made by Fisher in a Sept. 14, 1912 letter to Viscount Esher. Fisher referred to the ship as a "25-knot battleship." Since I can find no other reference to a ship matching that description, I have concluded that this ship was not built. I suspect the ship discussed in the Wikipedia article is a reincarnation of a HMS Incomparable capital ship with a different (i.e., battle cruiser vs. battleship) design. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waheid418 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Propulsion edit
Incomparable—range.
Although most accounts of this ship describe that it was to be driven by steam turbines, one account of this ship describes it as a "motor" driven.
It seems unlikely that the necessary range to circle the world without refuelling would be possible using steam engines. Using much more economical diesel engines similar, if larger, than those in a submarine would almost certainly give a considerably greater range.
Are any other details available?AT Kunene (talk) 09:47, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- Some disjointed (OCR limitations?) mentions here http://www.ebooksread.com/authors-eng/john-arbuthnot-fisher-fisher/memories-hsi/page-15-memories-hsi.shtml but it is in the context of Fisher bemoaning lack of progress in the area of diesel engines. (It strikes me that diesel would have been on his wishlist but if it had of been built it would have been steam.) GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:23, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- Diesels at the time were tiny things I think, of the order of a few hundred hp. I don't think it would be feasible in the timeframe to use a purely diesel powered BC. Greglocock (talk) 07:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
- The Germans had developed a 12000 hp diesel that was running in 1917, so you'd need 15 of them to get the required power, and get M.A.N. to sell them to you. Greglocock (talk) 07:51, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Inclusion in Category:World War I battlecruisers of the United Kingdom edit
Should this article be included in Category:World War I battlecruisers of the United Kingdom given that HMS Incomparable was never built so therefore did not participate in World War I? Dunarc (talk) 22:58, 29 April 2023 (UTC)