Corbett's case for speed and distant blockade

Andrew Lambert's account places Corbett's defence of speed within the controversy over Fisher's Dreadnought and Invincible. Large ships with turbine machinery offered sustained speed and strategic mobility, although the tactical balance between speed, protection, and firepower was a separate question. Britain's global position and refuelling facilities favoured this approach, while rival powers would have to sacrifice range to match the speed. Corbett challenged selective historical examples used against large, fast ships and rejected treating one campaign as a sufficient basis for doctrine. Torpedoes, submarines, and wireless telegraphy had changed the conditions of blockade so much that he regarded the old close blockade as impracticable. Speed also served defensive purposes, including catching oceanic raiders and avoiding unwanted engagements. Concentrating to attack in one area required accepting defensive tasks elsewhere, so a general preference for the offensive could not settle every strategic problem.