The passage credits German machinery weight savings and ammunition arrangements while noting serious flooding weaknesses in German ships. German propellant charges were less likely to destroy the ship during an ammunition fire, and their underwater protection was stronger amidships. British losses cannot be explained by armour alone: volatile propellant, inadequate flash precautions, poor armour-piercing shells, and uneven shooting all shaped the outcome. Better British shells, shooting, and flash protection would make a fairer comparison of the hull designs themselves. Even after allowing for those operational failures, however, Lion's protection against 11-inch and 12-inch fire at Dogger Bank remained a genuine design weakness.
Notable Point · 1:32:54
Separating battlecruiser design from ammunition and gunnery failures
A book discussion separates hull protection from British propellant, flash-safety, shell, and shooting problems when comparing battlecruiser losses.