What do you mean "common misconception"? Why would a smaller coastal design be better able to deal with coastal forts?In theory, the "Formidabile" was also impervious for any guns that Austrian have on Lissa. And she was even better protected, with her complete belt without exposed ends. The results... weren't so good, decpite she weren't penetrated. It's a common misconception, that bigger, ocean-capable ships are able to dealt with coastal fortifications better than smaller, coastal designes.
In any case, the British mounted successful bombardments with battleships in the Crimean War and at Alexandria (1882).
Not much at all, not at design load. The rudder's almost entirely submerged.Problem is, parts of the rudder is above water...
As you can see from here:
the rudder is mostly red, with only a very small portion black. This matters because:
...if you examine the roman numerals at her bow, you can see that the white line is actually her historical load line. She's several feet higher out of the water as a museum ship than her design draft.
That's an armoured ship that lost her rudder to a ramming attempt, not a wooden ship with her rudder destroyed by shot. You may need to find a better example."Re D'Italia" beg to differ.