Editing Tegetthoff-class battleship (section)

===Assessment===
[[File:Viribus Unitis Line Drawing.jpg|thumb|right|300px|A line drawing of ''Viribus Unitis'', lead ship of the ''Tegetthoff'' class|alt=Schematics for this type of battleship; the ships mount four gun turrets, two forward and two aft]]
Although smaller than the contemporary dreadnought and super-dreadnought battleships of the German ''Kaiserliche Marine'' and the British Royal Navy, the ''Tegetthoff'' class was the first of its type in the [[Mediterranean Sea|Mediterranean]] and [[Adriatic Sea]]s.{{sfn|Sokol|1968|p=69}} The ''Tegetthoff''s were described by former Austro-Hungarian naval officer Anthony Sokol in his book ''The Imperial and Royal Austro-Hungarian Navy'' as "excellent ships", and were acknowledged as some of the most powerful of their type in the region. Their design signaled a change in Austro-Hungarian naval policy, as the ships were capable of far more than coastal defense or patrolling the Adriatic Sea.{{sfn|Sokol|1968|p=69}} The ''Tegetthoff''s were so well received that when the time came to [[Ersatz Monarch-class battleship|plan for the replacement]] of Austria-Hungary's old {{sclass|Monarch|coastal defense ship}}s, the navy elected to simply take the layout of the ''Tegetthoff'' class and enlarge them to have a slightly greater tonnage and larger main guns.{{sfn|Greger|1976|pp=25–26}}

Despite these praises, criticisms of the ''Tegetthoff''-class design exist. Friedrich Prasky refers to the ships in his article ''The Viribus Unitis class'' "The ships were too small and had a very low range of stability."{{sfn|Prasky|1978|p=105}} Erwin Sieche writes in his article ''S.M.S. Szent István: Hungaria's Only and Ill-Fated Dreadnought'' "There had been much quibbling about the bad design of the ''Tegetthoff'' class and the bad workmanship and riveting of the ''Szent István'' in particular."{{sfn|Sieche|1991|p=137}} Poor riveting has been blamed for the sinking of ''Szent István'',{{sfn|Scheltema de Heere|1973|pp=82–83}}{{sfn|Prasky|1978|p=105}} and Karl Mohl, chief [[non-commissioned officer]] of ''Szent István''{{'}}s machinery, reported that the rivets from the ships snapped loose during the battleship's sinking.{{sfn|Sieche|1991|p=137}} Furthermore, reports emerged following the ship's gunnery trials of rivets in the double bottom of the hull being blown out of their sockets.{{sfn|Prasky|1978|p=106}} The sinking of ''Szent István'' revealed several flaws in the design of the ships' armor. The naval commission investigating the loss of the battleship ultimately concluded: "The distance between mine armor and 15-cm-ammunition magazines is too small and a major design failure, which most probably caused the widening of the leak."{{sfn|Sieche|1991|p=135}} Following ''Szent István''{{'}}s sinking, it was also discovered that her [[propeller]] shafts had such a high degree of resistance that the ship's rudder could only be laid at a maximum angle of 10° at full speed or else she would suffer from a heavy [[list (watercraft)|list]].{{sfn|Sieche|1991|p=137}}