rb
—z c]V9....P.
all^a
OUR IRON-CLAD SHIPS; THEIR QUALITIES, rERFORMANCES,
AKD
COST.
WITH CHAPTERS ON
TUERET
SHIPS, IRON-CLAD RAMS, &
By
E.
J.
REED,
C.B.,
CHIEF CONSTRtrCTOR OF THE NAVY, VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE IXSTITL'TION OP NAVAL ARCHITECTS, AND HONORARY MEMRER OF THE LIVERPOOL LITERARY AND PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.
WITH ILLUSTRATIONS.
LONDON: JOPIN
MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREE 1869. The right of Tianshifiun
is
reserved.
.-^^
LONDON
:
rUINTKD BT WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, STAJIFOKD STREET, AND CHAKIKG CROSS.
Alfred.
5.
ch.
6.
Clyde,
oa 1
Sovereign,
rvitch.
46. 47. 15.
16.
Viper. Favorite. Penelope. Enterprise. Caledonia. Prince Consort.
7.
TO THE
RIGHT HONOURABLE HUGH FIRST LORD OF
C.
E.
CHILDERS,
M.P.,
THE ADMIRALTY,
^hx% ihlxxim IS
RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY
THE AUTHOR.
—
^
I.NTEODOCTION. The
iron-clad
ship question
is
discussion in the public press, so
much importance
and
justly
is
deemed of
to the country, that the publication
of further information respecting
many ways
continually under
so
desirable.
it
appears to be in
It is a question
which cannot
—which the present work —
be thoroughly discussed in jDopular language alone I propose to employ in
embraces is
many profound
for it
scientific
problems
a large mass of information relating to
perfectly susceptible of familiar exposition,
there
is
no good reason
for withholding
;
but there
it
which
is
and which
from the reading
public.
The only
sources of such information at present open
are undoubtedly insufficient.
The annual speeches of
the Parliamentary representatives of the Admiralty able
and copious as they often are
numerous
facts
ships untouched
—necessarily
leave
and considerations concerning iron-clad ;
and although the newspapers abound
with intelligence upon the subject, they do not attempt to
supply the place of connected and comprehensive
statements embracing the subject as a whole,
do they seek to set
it
point of view as those
still
less
before the public from the same
who
daily regard
from a nearer stand-point. In
fact,
it,
so to speak,
a candid and genei'al
survey of the iron-clad ship question
will, I
welcomed by none more cordially than
l)y
am
sure, be
gentlemen of
— Introduction.
vi
the press, whose duty and privilege
and
extent, to shape
know
I
which tion
direct the national opinion.
likely to receive, impartial representa-
and advocacy than
provided only that its
iron-clad fleet
The
be understood.
it
is
iron-clad ship question,
this
efficiency of
of foremost importance to a small,
maritime country like
isolated,
to a large
is,
question which better deserves, or
of no
more
is
it
anchored on the
this,
edge of a continent like Europe, entrusted with the care of world-wide interests, and charged to maintain
power upon the tion
sea at a time
setting at
is
warfare, and
the times
naught
mocking
when
all
the spirit of inven-
systems of ocean
past
at every trace
and
tradition of
when we won our naval renown.
portion as the past
is
its
In pro-
prolonged into the present
we
are
weakened and endangered capabilities of iron and steam are developed we are strengthened and made safe. This is no time, then, for clinging to any type of ship, or any feature of naval construction, merely because it is old and accustomed no time for rejecting things because they are new and ;
unaccustomed.
in proportion as the novel
But, on the other hand, this being pre-
eminently a time of risk because of the transitions are passing through,
it
is
making our great experiments with scrupulous and
for
we
pre-eminently a time for care,
wasting nothing on methods which cannot
succeed.
There are special circumstances which render a broad
and
clear review of the question peculiarly desirable at
present.
Some
of these arise out of the essentially
transitional character of the period,
tinual
owing
improvement of guns and armour.
to the con-
In a time of
Introdtictio7i.
vii
transition, for example, j)ublic criticism
from
its
becomes loosed
usual restraints, and runs into error and ex-
Under ordinary circumstances, the conand behaviour of a war ship would admittedly
travagance. struction
be an abstruse and so
many changes
scientific
question
;
but now,
are in progress, there
when
scarcely a
is
town or country, which does not undertake to prescribe the proper forms, dimensions, and fighting features of war ships. Hence it happens that great
journal, in
diversity of feeling
and opinion prevails on
this subject,
and it is not to be expected that any Board of Admiralty, or Admiralty designer, will give universal satisfaction.
And,
further, a time of transition
ojDportunity for
all
kinds
of our
war
and minor advantages
ships, carries
of persons;
many
to
complain
of a
—
others.
in-
A
large orders to private
of,
first class
much
is
larger
number
also, it is to the
and even
by the responsible
from very long iron-clads
for a
it
to a
that, for this cause
so
the ships built
with
these considerations there
of the
persons
even a very considerable change in the type
firms,
interest of
a time of
also
and many
ventors, patentees, contractors, radical, or
is
of interested
to denounce,
authorities.
Besides
the fact, that the change
to shorter
and handier ships
was brought about by the
substitution
young and comparatively untried Chief Constructor much older and more experienced officer a change
—
whicli naturally furnished a to the
powers that were.
new
occasion for hostility
All these things have tended
to obscure the true state of the subject,
and
to suggest
the necessity for such a record and statement as I
propose to
offer.
I
now
cannot hope that I have discussed
every branch of the subject with perfect impartiahty,
Introduction,
viii
for
it
not possible to maintain absolute composure
is
amid the din and worry of during the
battle,
my work
and most of
seven years has been done under
last
and under the
fire,
and
too, of noisy
not always powerful, ordnance.
fire,
distracting, if
Nevertheless I have
written, as I have worked, with the feeling that the
only object worth consideration in this matter production
what are
of
the Navy, and therefore I
really
am
the
best
is
the
ships
for
not without confidence
in the general fairness of the following pages.
One will,
of the results of the publication of this
I trust, be to induce persons to look a
little
work more
closely than heretofore to the true causes of the different
performances of the ships, both under steam and under canvas.
not only
It is
sense and
common
idle, it is
contrary to
experience, to visit
common
upon the designer
which are obviously the consequences of imperfect management. I appeal to the experience of the best seamen in our Navy when I ask
all
those short-comings
if
ships do not
The
hands.
which it is
all
perform very differently in different
sailing of a ship is
persons are equally
only those
by no means an
skilful.
who have combined
On
art in
the contrary,
great ability with
great devotion and professional love of their work,
who
have been eminently successful in establishing that delicate and beautiful relationship between the ship, the
sails,
the helm, and the wind, which
is
essential to
great success in this branch of the sailor's
art.
The
trim of the ship has to be watched and studied, the
numerous detached into careful
sail-surfaces
have to be brought
may
co-operation, so that each
utmost propulsive
effort,
out of the wind
;
take the
the helm has
.
In trodicction to be so used that the ship
and find
way through
its
may
it
i
x
be humoured to the sea,
with as
little
obstruction as
These things cannot be accomplished with a a day some little experience, at least, of
possible.
new ship in a new craft
:
indispensable to the sailor's success in
is
managing her
and, above
;
all,
he must possess the art
of adapting his measures to the qualities and circumstances of the ship he sailing of
an
is
iron-clad,
called
upon
The
to handle.
with an extremely powerful
rudder, and an enormous screw-propeller dragging in front of
it
—the best position
for
which screw, when not
by experience
revolving, can only be ascertained
obviously a more
an old-fashioned skill
difficult
—
is
operation than the sailing of
and therefore requires greater and attention than was demanded of old^ the more frigate,
so as the pitches of the differ greatly.
How
considerations,
and
ship, of
under
new
all
vain
screws of the various ships it is,
to take
it
then, to ignore all these for
granted that a
new
type, will exhibit her best sailing powers
circumstances.
Yet
this
has been done over
and over again with our iron-clad ships and even ships which have proved the best sailers in the fleet one year, on repeated trials and under various conditions, ;
have been pronounced a year later as the worst in the
same
fleet,
upon the design
and the'consequent
discredit has fallen
—a circumstance of but
in itself, but of
very great moment when
the remedies which should be applied.
moment
little
attention from the true causes of the fxilure,
to
sailers
it
diverts
and from
It really
ought
be l)orne in mind that ships which have sailed re-
markably well one season, and have undergone no considerable change,
would
sail
well the next under similar
Introduction,
handling.
In like manner the performances of the
ships under steam are, as I have
shown
subject to the greatest possible variations
in the text,
by
differences
when but Navy have now intro-
of management, especially at the present time
few of the engineer or other
officers
of the
had much experience of the contrivances duced into all our ships with the view of economising fuel
—superheaters,
surface-condensers, &c.
The
enor-
mous modern steam-engines, furnished with those appliances, present an entirely new field for the experience of our officers and men, and a field which
it is
absolutely
necessary to cultivate with the greatest assiduity and
by such engines that the great Channel England will be propelled for many years to
care, as it is
Fleets of
come.
This
is,
to
my
mind, a very important point, for
I foresee in it the certain reversal of the past practice
of bringing our large
war
ships together for squadron
evolutions almost as soon as they are out of the builders'
hands. the
Until this year
it
has rarely happened that
captain and engineer have had even a
week
at
sea in their ship, with freedom to vary their steaming
operations as they found necessary for the full develop-
ment of
all
those
specialities
every engine more or
of performance
The new
less exhibits.
which
ship has
been placed almost at once under the orders of the
Admiral of the Channel Squadron
for the time being,
and whatever steaming has thenceforward been done has been done to order, or rather to orders, for a single signal from the
Admiral often
results in
from the deck to the engine-room.
twenty signals
I have heard on
good authority, and from more than one ship, that when tlie squadron has been ascertaining, each ship for
xi
Introductio7i.
itself,
the
number of
ing to a given
revolutions per minute correspond-
speed of ship, nearly
fifty
orders for
altering speed have been received in the engine-room in a single hour.
month or two
If allowed a
at sea
under steam, with the necessary coal for the purpose, and with freedom from external control, a good captain and engineer would ascertain the number of enginerevolutions required for every grade of speed with the
greatest ease and nicety, and would add to this
ledge
all
know-
those nice adjustments and minor modifications
of the engines which would not only prevent those de-
rangements which sometimes result in large but would also lead to great economy of cation,
and of labour. Another month
alone,
under canvas, would enable
or
repairs,
fuel, of lubri-
two of cruising
officers to
bring out
the best qualities of their ships, and would avoid those
strange anomalies and discrepancies which abound in
some reports of the squadron
Nor can
it
sailings of our iron-clads.
be doubted that with proper care the rolling of
the ships might, where desirable, be materially modified,
by
altered stowage of weights,
first
by consuming the
coal
out of certain bunkers, and the stores out of certain
store-rooms,
and by other
foregoing considerations evident that while
like contrivances.
will
it
the designer
at least is
From
the
be perfectly
bound
to
do his
utmost to give good qualities to his ship, her performances by no means rest in his hands alone.
would
I
also observe that the peace performances of such
ships as the
'
Bellerophon,'
ofter absolutely
*
Hercules,'
and ^Monarch,'
no indication whatever of what their
fighting performances would be, seeing that their massive
armour and mighty armaments take no
})art
in ])eace
Introduction,
xii
even
not a
It is
trials.
little
absurd sometimes to observe
grave and reverend signiors " solemnly discuss-
''^
— say the mere
ing some wholly secondary performances sailing
—of these
ponderous steam fighting engines, in
total disregard of their
ing qualities
but
;
it
armour, guns, rams, and steam-
ceases to be absurd,
when one persons who influence distressing,
hears,
would have been a great
It
misfortune to the country
Navy had
he sometimes does,
as
public opinion and action, com-
mitting the same error.
its
and becomes
if
the
Administrators of
aimed primarily at pro-
in these days
ducing floating bodies which the wind could blow about easily and rapidly, to the sacrifice of armour, guns,
rams, and steaming powers;
while feeling the
full
seas,
am
I,
for
one,
importance of giving good sailing
that are to cruise in foreign and
qualities to ships
remote
and
well content to see our floating Channel
and Mediterranean Fortresses well armoured, well armed, and well supplied with steam they
may
be,
and must
propellers,
even although
be, a little less compliant to the
breeze than were the frigates and liners of the past. is
nevertheless satisfactory to
have not only
frigates
sail
know
enough
It
that our armoured to be useful to
them
near home, but enough to take them abroad, perform
and bring them back again. The has gone so well through one commission in
good service *
Ocean
'
there,
the China seas that she
there
for
Alfred,' in Pacific
another
;
is
about to be re-commissioned
the same
North America, and of the
—the
last
news of the
performing a service under our
latest
true
is
wooden
sloops of
'
of the
war
Royal
Zealous,' in the
latter ship
sail
'
being that in
she outstripped one of ;
and the
'
Favorite,'
Introductio7i,
xiii
while on the American station, raced with and beat
one
under canvas
and has
corvettes,
wooden returned from America to
our
of
since
and
latest
best
England, and cast anchor at Spithead, under
alone.
sail
" will, I hope, clear
chapter on "
Armour The much of the misapprehension
away
that has hitherto existed
respecting the relative strength of the armour of the
We
English and other ships.
have ships
securely armoured than any French
at sea
vessel,
more
and several
which are very much stronger still. The surprising strength of the American Monitors has been much urged in this country, and has been
in course of construction
House of Lords
extolled in the
of
Commons
the
'
:
the reader will examine the section of
if
all
the
American Monitors bears no
own
comparison with our
armour
its
a reference to page 44 will convince Dictator,'
which has been exhibited
so very often,
is,
after
all,
even as
later vessels,
regards the uniform thickness of
'
House
Kalamazoo,' on page 35, he will see that even
the strongest of real
as well as in the
him
;
while
that
the
to us in terrorem
a feeble construction,
its
armour diappearing almost immediately beneath the water's surface, so that every passage of a wave must expose
its
unarmoured part
to shot
and
shell. It will
seen from this chapter, and especially from
on page 31, that
I consider that Sir
my
be
remarks
William Fairbairn
and Sir William Armstrong have been premature (to say the least) in their advocacy if I have not mis-
—
understood them the future.
but
all
—of the
This result
the time
this
abandonment of armour
for
may ultimately be brought about, countrv can maintain, with a
Introductmi,
xvi
nor armour will be abandoned, and our clear duty for
some time
to
come
and speculative
will be to avoid alike false analogies
forecasts,
and
to develop as
steadily
power both of the gun with which w^e assail the enemy, and of the armour with which we repel hi^ assaults upon us. As an and
as rapidly as heretofore the
encouragement to
this course it
may
perhaps be not
amiss to mention that I have myself devised plans for
carrying extremely heavy armour which
has not yet
it
been necessary to divulge, but which will come into active play when we have attained to the use of such thicknesses of armour as are
now deemed
too great for
even a moment's consideration by those who think superficially
upon
this subject.
The chapter on the Armament of the forth the remarkable progress
navy have made
Iron-clads sets
which the guns of the
in the last few years.
It is
but five
years ago that Parliament was discussing the practicability
of carrying
broadside ships
;
sea with perfect
Hercules
'
especially
we have now 12-ton guns, fought ease, in many of the broadside ships
the Mediterranean '
6^-ton guns at sea,
in at
of
and Channel squadrons, and the
has long been cruising about, both at
home
and abroad, with 18-ton guns worked most satisfactorily above the
at the broadside in ports 11 feet
a horizontal range of
fire
broadside guns possess.
sea,
and with
which no unarmoured
The
'
Monarch
'
ship's
has cruised
successfully in heavy weather with 25-ton guns moimted
in turrets.
can
None but those who are
now doubt
that,
hopelessly prejudiced
whether they be placed
in turrets or
out of turrets, the largest guns can be worked successfully and with terrible effect at sea, and in heavier
xvii
Introdiiction,
weather than the small guns of old could be fought.
my
For
part I look with lively expectation to the pro-
duction of seen
much more powerful guns than we have
I believe that the
;
yet
wonderfully strong and beauti-
uniform metal, the manufacture of which Sir
fully
Joseph Whitworth has worked out with so much
and perseverance, direction,
is
opening up new
skill
possibilities in this
which may yet be coupled with the superior
range, aim, low trajectory, and prolonged velocity which his
ordnance system promises, and I have no doubt
whatever that even the largest and best gun with which
any other system may provide
either this or
need
effectually carried, and^ if
be,
us, will
be
gallantly fought at
sea beneath our flag. I
beg leave
recommend
to
to the thoughtful attention
of the reader the chapter on the " Structure " of our
The
ships.
but there
sulrject is
not one that strikes the attention,
no part of the iron-clad ship question more
is
fraught with practical and economical considerations,
nor
to do
any other feature which has had
there
is
so
much
with the present superiority of our ships as com-
pared with those of other Powers.
If
much anxious
thought, attention, and inventive labour had not been
devoted to this branch of the subject, the nation could not have had such ships as the
and
*
Audacious
of armour and
'
in
its
navy
their calibre
;
'
Hercules,'
'
Monarch,*
to carry their substance
and number of guns, with
unimproved structural arrangements, ships must have been built of far larger proportions, and have cost very
much more
;
while the
'
Thunderer
'
class,
which
is
being built under the auspices of the present Board of
Admiralty, must have been almost double their present h
— Introdtiction.
xviii
and
size
I repeat, this
cost.
branch of the subject
not one which ordinarily engages notice, but second to none in
its
is
it
is
economical importance, or in
its
relation to the offensive
and defensive powers of the
navy. It is
much
unnecessary to refer at
length to the
The
chapter on the Steaming properties of the ships.
recent cruise of the combined squadrons has signally
and conclusively shown how utterly unfounded were those statements which represented that I had sacrificed
the steaming capabilities of the
*
Hercules
and other
'
by improperly curtailing the coal supply. I have shown in the text that, owing to their moderate consumption of fuel, consequent upon their possessing recent ships
engines of the
but are
much
former ships. is
new
superior in this respect to most of the
Now,
given
?
These
'
Times' of October 4, 1869,
:
and what are the
trials,
that the consumption of the
compared with that of the
land/ and designers),
be
in the
printed the consumption of the ships during the
recent squadron
as
type, they are not only not inferior,
it
'
Agincourt
was
'
as follows
'
Minotaur,'
'
facts there
Hercules,'
'
Northumber-
(three sister ships of former
—
all
the ships being employed,
remembered, upon the same
service, viz., proceed-
ing together from Plymouth to Gibraltar, from Gibraltar to Lisbon,
and from Lisbon
to
Queenstown
Minotaur Northumberland Agincourt Hercules
As
the
'
Hercules
'
carries as
much
the other three ships within fifty tons,
Tons.
Cwt.
605 579 545 297
10 19
:
4
9
coal as each of it
is
perfectly
— xix
Introduction.
obvious that I have even underrated in the text her
advantage in
this
The
over former ships.
resjiect
Monarch did not exhibit nearly such good results as the Hercules,' owing chiefly to the packing of her '
'
*
piston-rods blowing out, and to some leakage of steam
past the pistons into the
vacuum
but even with her
;
consumption very largely increased from these causes, she burnt 107 tons
less
tons less than the
North lunberland,' and
'
than the 'Agincourt.'
coal than the 'Minotaur,'
The Bellerophon '
81|
4:7| tons less '
— another of
the recent ships which has been complained of for an
—
power is shown by Times to have burnt much
alleged deficiency of coal-carrying
the figures quoted in the less
'
'
than the ships of former design, the consumption of
The
which has been given.
figures for her are not
completely given, but her consumption from Plymouth
and from Gibraltar
to Gibraltar,
to Lisbon, are shown,
and, compared with those of the other three long and fine-lined
follows
and
ships,
with
the
'
as
:
Tons.
Minotaur Northumbcrlana Agincourt T
Hercules
These
figures,
phon was '
less
S
33.^
«
although they show that
3
17 9
tlie
'
Bellero-
economical in her coal consumption than
show that she burns than the other three ships, and that her supply
her successor, the less
Cwt.
o-"»G
320 235 184
Bellerophou
much
are
Hercules,'
of 5 GO tons
is
'
Hercules,' also
capable of steaming her for a greater dis-
tance than they can steam with their somewhat larger quantities.
I
hope these
facts,
taken
witli those
given
in the text, will completely dispel the error of those
XX
who
Introdiictio7i,
question the capability of the
new
make
ships to
passages under steam as effectually as other ships.
have but I
little
doubt that the calculations by which
have been led in the text to place the
high in trials
I
this respect, will
'
Monarch very '
be fully vindicated in future
with the engines in an
efficient state.
In previous observations upon the performances of the ships I have remarked at some length upon their
The recent
sailing qualities. so far as
it
cruise of the squadron, in
has been publicly reported, has not added
materially to our knowledge as regards this part of
In the letter of the correspondent of the
the subject.
'Times,' published in that journal of September 18th,
Hercules
'
and
sailed but indifferently
;
but
certain trials are recorded in *
Monarch appear '
to have
as these ponderous
which the
and powerful ships raced under
canvas only on the special
trial
and one very lightly armoured feel
surprise
at
their defeat;
remembering that
'
with two unarmoured
am
ship, I
although
it
unable to
worth
is
in a former letter, published on the
7th of September, the same gentleman, with the great-
same two ships, heavilyarmoured and armed as they are, each " appeared to " feel and spring to the pressure of her sails, although
est fairness, stated that these
" there
was but a pleasant and, indeed, a light summer's There can be but little doubt that these recent
" breeze." ships,
although so heavily burdened with thick armour
and immense guns, have combined therewith
sail
enough to enable them to greatly economise which is the great object of their sails, and
their
tain that
of this
it
work
will be highly satisfactory to to learn that the
'
Hercules
'
power fuel.,
I feel cer-
many
readers
went through
xxi
l7itrod2iction.
all tlie
weeks that
service performed during the five
the Admiralty flag floated over the Channel Squadron,
and returned
to
England with but one-half of her
coal
consumed.
The question of the
" rolling " of the ships received
very useful illustration during the doctrine that a low freeboard
is
The
late cruise.
indispensable to steadi-
The lofty-sided was then finally overthrown. armoured broadside ship Hercules,' the lofty-sided unarmoured broadside ship Inconstant,' and the loftyness
^
*
sided
armoured turret ship
*
Monarch,' were
all
signally
steady even in a heavy sea-way, and formed gun-plat-
forms superior in steadiness to any previous ships. is stated, '
It
possibly with truth, that on one occasion the
Monarch,' from the superior elevation of her guns,
could have fought
them with greater
than any other ship
from the
;
ease and efficiency
but I cannot for a moment infer
some have done, either that she possessed
this, as
to destroy all the other ships, or that
power
superiority as a fighting ship
was thus
established.
her I
cannot imagine why, even on this one extremely boisterous day, a squadron of ships carrying
upper-deck guns, and
still
more or
less
a squadron of steam-
less
and Hercules,' should he Monarch and, on the idle under the attack of the other hand, I am quite certain that the Monarch was rams
like the
'
Bellerophon
*
'
*
;'
'
'
less capable,
on
all
withstanding the
the other days of the five weeks, of
fire
of the
'
Hercules
'
than the
'
Her-
was of withstanding the Monarch's,' for every shot fired at short range from the central battery of the Hercules would penetrate the Monarch's water-line and boilers, while the water-line and boilers of the
cules
*
'
'
'
'
'
'
Introduction,
xxii
'
Hercules
'
are protected from the
a deep and impregnable of the
'
Monarch
turret system
paratively
is
of the
turrets
much armour
so as
leave com-
to
men
It
engagement
their omnipotence
would be
and the impotence of other ships would be secured.
It is
very satisfactory indeed
Admiralty turret-ship
'
is
on
only, that these
miraculous exploits of turret-ships take place actual
by
The weakness
the sides of the ship.
for
paper, and in the imaginations of
fire
'
due mainly to the
which demands
itself,
little
Monarch's
armour-belt.
in this respect
protection
the
for
'
'
in
:
an
qualified,
less easily
to find that the
Monarch,' of which everything
bad was originally predicted
— and which Captain Coles
energetically disclaimed, as not representing his views
of a turret ship, nor giving the principle a satisfactory trial
—has
and
proved a
assuredly
which
I
I
fast,
shall
steady,
and formidable
decry those
not
have laboured hard
real
ship,
merits
to secure to her; but
a great and critical question of this nature
on
we must
by hasty inferences to false and perilous conclusions, but must enlarge our experience, weigh opposing considerations, and accept only well-established not pass
and well-matured fully
results.
I
have, however, dwelt so
upon the various aspects of
ject in the chapter
enlarge upon
An
it
this part of the sub-
on Turret-Ships, that
need not
I
here.
impression has gone abroad to the effect that the
balanced rudder has failed
;
but this
is
not the case.
The balanced rudder has accomplished most fully the great object which it was introduced to aid, viz. the endowment of our
iron-clad steam -frigates
with that necessarv handiness which the
and rams *
Warrior
xxiii
Introd2ictio7i.
The and Bellerophon/ handiness of the Monarch under steam is most remarkable, and all
and some other early iron-clads did not '
'
'
possess.
Hercules,'
'
When under canvas,
that could be desired.
rudder requires careful handling, but a appears to remove
the balanced practice
little
With
all difficulties in that respect.
twin -screws in light-draught armoured vessels,
form of rudder does not appear will probably not
answer
well,
and
in the
it
and
is
object thoroughly well,
backs as would for a
But
American monitors.
in the large steam frigates
has answered
its
prime
without any such draw-
moment justify
its
condemnation.
The chaj)ters on the Cost of our iron-clad
fleet,
upon the deeply important question of " Rams," speak for themselves.
mend to and who
'J'he
those gentlemen will learn in
ture ujDon
new
commend
I trust that
former
who
I respectfully
and
shall
com-
study naval economy,
the real facts of that expendi-
it
iron-clads respecting
apprehension has existed fully
it
be repeated in such vessels, although
common enough
it is
to
this
;
which
so
much
mis-
the latter I no less respect-
to the earnest study of our naval officers.
by means of
their consideration of,
and sug-
gestions upon, the branch of naval construction and
warfare there treated, I interest
The
and value of
final chapter,
may
this chapter in future editions.
on the Conversion of wooden Line-
of-battle Ships into
Iron-clads, will correct, I believe,
some misapprehensions on to
show
be enabled to add to the
this subject,
that the devotion of large
and will serve
sums of money
to
such conversions woukl liave been the means of spend-
ing
sncli
vessels.
sums upon weak, decaying, and wasteful
xxiv
Introduction,
If in this Introduction, or in the to write with praise or I
would ask the reader
work
complacency of
to believe that I
itself, I
my own
seem
works,
have not written
book with that or any other personal end in view, but with the object of stating publicly facts which
this
deeply concern the public, and respecting which
Members of Parliament and and authority reviewers of
and
other gentlemen of weight
in the State, together
my
former work on
'
with several of the
Shipbuilding in Iron
have expressed a strong wish
Steel,'
many
than has hitherto been published.
to learn
more
Having entered
upon the task of writing such a book, I have felt bound to write it freely and frankly, without staying to nicely balance
my
and readers thing that
phrases, trusting to the generosity of critics to
put a kindly interpretation upon any-
may seem
to require
it.
—
NTE
C
i\
T
CHAPTER
..
S.
I.
VARIETIES OF IRON-CLADS. PAGE
All iron-clad navies marked by variety Earliest European iron-clads were floating batteries La Gloire and Warrior much like ordinary ships Recent ii-on-clads difterently shaped at bow and stern Radical and minor changes must be distinguished Minor modifications often result from gradual advance on a settled plan Summary of principal changes made since Warrior was built '
*
'
1
2 2
'
'
.
7
G
'
changes necessitated by progress made in armour and guns Rough estimate of strengths of armour in several iron-clads Other causes that have introduced variety
Many
:
.
3 4 4
.
,
8
—
8 9 10 10
Necessity for ships of different sizes
Adoption of twin-screws Abandonment of extreme lengths Variety in our iron-clads does not prevent their acting together Nor give rise to such different performances as do secondary causes Trials of Channel Squadrons prove this
..
..
11
11
Details of full-speed trial of 1st November, 1866
12
26th November, 1867 Remarks on sailing capabilities of Tallas Increase in ramming power litis also led to variety Structural modifications have done the same Variety probably advantageous in actual warfare
15 17
'
'
CHAPTER ARMOUR OF THE
22
11.
IRON-CLADS.
Thicknesses of armour and backing of English ships Warrior and otlier early iron-clads '
19
20
:
Minotaur class, and th-jir .strength as compared with Lord Clyde and licjrd Warilen Rellcrophon,' and improvemcjits made in this target Penelope Monarch and Captain 'Hercules' Recent monitors, and projected designs Tabular statement of
*
'
'
'
'
'
*
'
*
24
'
'
'
'
'
'
Warrior
'
..
25 26 26 27 2!) 2!» ^<1 ''^-
— —
xxvi
... .
Contents. PAGE
Tkicknesses of armour and backing of French ships Comparative strength of French and English iron-clads American system of laminated armour Comparative strength of laminated, " built-up," and solid armour Thicknesses of armour and backing of American ships Systems of disposing armour on iron-clads Warrior plan partial protection Hector plan „ „ * Minotaur plan— complete protection Enterprise plan central battery and armour-belt Comparison between tliese plans
.
. .
33 36 37 38 41
:
—
'
'
'
'
'
—
'
'
Upper-deck armoured batteries of Invincible class French and American systems Importance of deck-armour in monitors Breastwork-monitor system, compared with American system system of our other turret-ships „ „ „ '
'
CHAPTER ARMAMENT OF THE Armament
Warrior
'
.
.
.
.
.
*
employed
to obtain
.
.
'
'
52 54
IKON-CLADS.
wood Hne-of-battle ships and frigates and other early iron-clads mode in weiglit and power of our guns during last ten years Eeduetion in number and increase in power of guns carried by iron-clads Table of weights, charges, &c., of naval guns, and remarks thereon Progress made m French naval guns Comparative powers of French and P^nglish guns Progress made in American naval guns Comparative powers of American and English guns Fight between the Weehawken and A talanta Keport of American Ordnance Committee in February 1869 Necessity for great horizontal range of fire for protected guns, and means '
51
III.
of latest
„ Progress
45 45 46 47 48 50 50
'
56 57 57 58 61
63 63 64 Qh 66 67
G8
it
CHAPTER
IV.
STRUCTURE OF THE IRON-CLADS. Our
irun-clads mostly iron-built
'
..
Reasons why some of them are wood-built Reasons for tl;e preference of iron to wood hulls Iron
.
7I
„
„
stronger
„
„
more durable
,,
,,
safer
when
..
properly constructed
ships are very valuable
French have continued the use of wood ships, at present, liave the
70 70
:
liulls are ligiiter
Our wood-built
Wood
,
their reasons for so doing advantage of keeping clean bottoms ;
.
.
.
.
.
.
72 73 76 77 77 78
—
—
.
Contents,
xxvii
Schemes for preventing fouling of iron ships' bottoms Improvements made in recent iron-built irou-clads
79
:
Description of
Warrior
'
'
sj'stem of construction
80
Bellcrophon „ „ „ „ Contrast between the two systt-ms Precautions in recent ships against loss by torpedoes Greater shot-resisting power of later ships' sides Summary of improvements, and Dr. Fairbairn"s remarks thereon Reductions of weight of hull in recent ships Table illustrating reductions Remarks on table •
81
'
81
82 85 85 86 87 88
and weight of armour due in great measure to these improvements
Incrciised thickness
structural
CHAPTEE
91
V.
STEAMING OF THE IRON-CLADS. Necessity for comparing steaming capabilities of irou-clads and wood ships Gradual improvements made in wood frigates and liuc-of-battle ships .. .. corvettes and sloops by our iron-clads speeds of iron-clads and unarmoured ships
„
„
Summary
,,
of full speeds attained
Comparison between full Speeds attained by several iron-clads on six hours' run at sea Half-power speeds of iron-clads Comparison between full speeds of unarmoured ships and half-power speeds .
.
.
of iron-clads
Objections to measured-mile trials of speed considered Difficulty of adding to speeds already high Speeds attained by French irou-clads Speeds attained by American iron-clads Coal supply of our iron-clads
93 93 94 95 96 97 98 98 99 100 101
103
:
False impressions entertained respecting
it
'I'rials
103 101 106
improved engines of recent ships Mistakes respecting times the coal carried would last Tal)le of times and distances several of our iron-clads and unarmoured ships could steam at 12^ and 1 1 knots Iron-clads not inferior to unarmoured ships in this respect Recent irou-clads superior to earlier iron-clads Further remarks on table of steam sl.ips at the measured mile Very generally condemned Purposes served by
109 110
Priuiary objects of
Ill
Its connection with the
:
Objections
made
Some methods
—
to
of "jockeying"
109
Ill
112 Ii;;
114
115
No
117
Some
117
such practices possible in trials of H.M. ships aluKjst unavoidable sources of error Coal and stoking should always be equally good
121
Reasons
123
for
preferring these trials to trials at sea
— —
Contents.
xxviii
CHAPTER
VI.
SAILING OF THE IRON-CLADS. PAGE
Capacity for sea-service necessary ia our ships Not lost sight of in our iron-clads Opinions of naval officers on their sailing power, extracted from Keport of Cliannel Squadron for 1864 1866 1867
125 126 :
127 128 130 130 132 133
1868
Voyages of Ocean and Concluding remarks '
'
'
Zealous '
CHAPTER
VII.
ROLLING OF THE IRON-CLADS. Mistakes prevalent respecting the rolling of these ships Iron-clads, as a whole, steadier than unarmoured ships Iron-clads proved to he fully capahle of fighting at sea Popular errors respecting rolling :
134 134 135
—
That top-heaviness in ii-on-clads causes rolling That ships with low free-hoard must be steady That mere weight tends to cause heavy rolling That the form of the bottom afiects rolling greatly
137 138 140 141 141 141 142 143 144 146 148
Difficulty of designing a steady iron-clad
Eolation between character of waves and ship's rolling Efi'ect
produced upon ship's behaviour by alterations in stowage
Methods
and recording
of observing
Principal theoretical deductions on
rolling tlie
subject of rolling
Practical applications of these deductions in recent ships
Trials at sea prove that these efibrts have been successful
Resume
of results of trials of ships in
Trials
made
Channel Squadrons
:
in 1864
..
..
1866 1867 1868 Concluding remarks
148 149 149 157 161
CHAPTER
VIII.
DIMENSIONS OF THE IRON-CLADS. Table of dimensions and proportions 'Warrior' compared witli our finest wood ships Design of Minotaur class Objections to these two classes Designs of Defence,' Hector,' and Caledonia classes French iron-clads all of moderate proportions Introduction of more moderate proportions in Bellerophon and than had been previously adopted in first-class iron-clads '
164 165 165 166 166 167
'
'
*
'
'
'
later ships
167
—
—
.
Contents.
xxix r-AGF.
Comparison between
Bellerophon
'
„
and Black Prince
1G8 169
*
'
'
'Achilles'
„
Moderate dimensions of Lord Clyde and Lord Warden Comparison between Lord Clyde and Black Prince Hercules and Black Prince „ „ '
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
171 172
'
'
'
173
Importance of handincss in iron-clads Admiral Sir Sidney Dacres' opinion :
„
Yelverton's
,,
„
Warden's
„
Opinions of other
174 175 175
officers
17(3
Superior handiness of recent short iron-clads Shown by turning trials on measured mile :
'
177 178 179
Hercules" remarkable handiness
Shown by turning trials at sea Kemarks on our experience with long and
short iron-clads
CHAPTER
181
IX.
FORMS AND PROPORTIONS OF IRON-CLADS. Weight of material
in hull should influence ship's form 183 Necessity for taking account of relation between form and weight of armour in iron-clads
Eemarks on
" constants of performance " of steam ships
These constants useful in calculating engine-power Not standards of merit for all steamships
And certiiinly not
new designs
for
..
..
for iron-clad vessels
Conditions under which constants are of use in comparing iron-clads .. .. Raising the constants of iron-clads should not be the aim of the naval architect
Remarks on
steam-trials of
'
Warrior,'
*
Minotaur,' and
*
Bellerophon
' , .
Necessity for taking speed in connection with horse-power, foulness, &c.
Results of trials with short iron-clads
frictional resistance of
..
,
More moderate proportions should be adopted armour are increased Great
.
as thickness
Illustration taken from trials of Minotaur' and Warrior' Abstract of paper on subject of relations between forms and weight of material
in iron-clads, read before
Comparison between tions, but in most Concluding remarks
'
*
Royal Society and design based on
Hercules
equal to
'
Hercules
CHAPTEE
196 196 197
200 *
'
otijer respects
189 190 194 195
and extent of
long iron-clads '
184 185 186 186 187 188
Minotaur's
'
propor-
208 212
'
X.
COST OF THE IRON-CLADS. Difficulty of estimating incidental
and establishment charges
for iron-clads
built in dockyards
System of charge introduced in 186r<, and its (fleet Example nominal costs of Achilles and Bellerophon Allowance of Vl\ per cent, on net cost suflicient for these charges '
:
'
'
'
..
..
214 214 215 216
—
XXX
—
... .
Contents,
Cost of iron-clads up to January, 1868
Of completed
page
:
broadside-ships, contract-built
217 218 219 220 221 221 222
government -built „ „ unfinished broadside ships, and turret ships Total expenditure „
„
Total expenditure up to J: muary, 1869 Total annual expenditures on navy from 1859 to 1869
Savings effected by introduction of short iron-clads
CHAPTEK
XI.
TURRET-SHIPS. Turret-ship question can now be discussed with fairness Heavy guns can be trained easily through largo arcs in turret ships
But can also be worked on the broadside Eeal advantages of the turret system— small port and great training Fighting of turret guns on both sides considered Turret system best adapted for ships without masts or sails Devices for adapting it to rigged ships No satisfactory plan yet carried out All-round fire of turret guns wanting in Captain ' and ^Monarch ' Importance of right-ahead fire from protected guns '
'
. .
.
.
.
,
. .
.
Stowage of boats in turret-ships Offensive and defensive powers of turret-ships :— Nearly all ships limited to simultaneous fire in two directions only Broadside guns each have independent training Captain and Hercules compared as to simultaneous fire of guns '
'
.
'
'
223 223 224 225 225 227 228 229 230 231 232
233 233 233 236
Turret ports, vulnerable points Revolution of turrets may be stopped by injury to glacis or deck 237 Mr. Eads' remarks on this point 239 Small and fast sea-going turret-ships carrying very heavy guns cannot ,
bebuilt Monitors of the American type
Not
240 :
satisfactory sea-going ships
241 242
Inferior to breastwork monitors
Resume of experience as to sea-going qualities of Mistakes as to sizes of Ocean voyages of Monadnock and Miantonomoh Comfort and healthiness of, mistakes respecting Fights with Confederate iron-clads not severe tests Engagements with land batteries, and their results Mr. Eads' remarks on dangers of turrets becoming jammed Concluding remarks '
'
'
'
.
CHAPTEE
.
.
.
.
243 246 246 249 250 251 254 254
XII.
IRON-CLAD RAMS. Revival of the ancient method of attack Construction of special classes of iron-clad rams American experience of ramming
255 256 257
—
—
—
..
xxxi
Contents.
PACK
Experience gained at Lissa
Handiness absolutely „
essential to efficiency
obtained principally by moderate dimensions
Extreme dimensions not necessary to give Other means of making ram-ships handy
sufficient
ramming power
. .
.
Fore-reaching ram-bows
Upright ram-bows Spur-shaped ram-bows Comparison between various forms Supposed disadvantages of the spur shape Mistakes made respecting loss of the sloop
Amazon,' and
'
its
bearing on the
ram-bow Bow- waves of si lips with spur-shaped ram-bows Strengthenings of ram-bows in wood-built ships efficiency of the spur-shaped
„ „ „ Provisions against loss by
274 280 281 282
iron-built ships
ramming made
in our iron-clads
Manoeuvring and working of iron-clad rams
258 259 261 262 264 2G5 266 266 268 272
284
:
Preparations on board the ram vessel
287 289 290
Speed and direction of attack Concluding remarks
CHAPTEK XIIL CONVERSION OF LINE-OF-BATTLE SHIPS INTO IRON-CLADS. Our navy
contains several converted iron-clads Ships completed could not re adily be converted in the same way But might be converted diiferently Most schemes for conversion have been based on turret armament Conversion of Royal Sovereign into turret-ship Better plans have been prepared Reasons why other ships have not been converted Extensive repairs would be required Hulls would be very heavy, and therefore armour inefficient Speeds low, engines worn, &c Probably behaviour at sea would be bad Proposals fur turning line-of-buttle ships into rigged Monitors Not satisfactory as to stability under canvas Do not provide sufficient buoyancy False basis of arguments for conversions Our wooden fleet a valuable reserve Concluding remarks '
.
.
.
'
292 293 293 293 294 295
:
..
..
296 296 298 298
:
300 300 302 302 303
APPENDIX. On
the stability of IMonitors under canvas
Index
305
•^'i'
xxxii
(
)
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
FRONTisriECE—Onr iron-clad ships
{to
face Title-page.)
'AGKS
34,35
Armour OF THE iRON-CLADS Sections of the armoured sides of Dispositions of
'
Thunderer' and Dictator '
' . .
.
.
armour on iron-clads
Armaments of the iron-clads
60
116,118
Diagrams iLLUSTRATiTE of measured-mile trials SllVIULTANEOUS FIRE OF PROTECTED GUNS IN
Sections of bows of '
Hotspur
'
Amazon,'
•
'
CaPTAIN AND HeRCULES '
Lord Clyde,'
'
'
. .
Bellerophon,'
. .
235
and 276
'
Diagrams illustrative of the stability of Monitors under | CANVAS
44 55
f
306, 310, 311
316,318.
;
OUR IRON-CLAD SHIPS Sljt.
CHAPTER
I.
VARIETIES OF IRON-CLADS. It
lias
often been remarked, as a matter of reproach to
the administrators and architects of the British ironclad navy, that the vessels composing
various in
size,
it
are extremely
power, speed, and other qualities.
—whether be a plaint or not — that their variety no doubt true
it
fair
is
It is
ground of com-
great,
and
is
yearly
But if the reader could glance with me over a French photograph which is lying before me, in which La Marine Moderne Cuirassee is
becoming greater
exhibited, he
exhibition
is
still.
would discover that our portion of the
characterised
by quite a tiresome appear-
ance of sameness in comparison with the iron-clads of
Our neighbours,
other countries.
the
French, have
particularly signalised themselves for variety of design.
any ships of such great length as some of ours but they have built them of very different sizes, speeds, and strengths, and have
They have
not,
it is
true, built ;
equipped them with rigs and than those of British ships.
much l)ut ill
in the
way
sails
even more diversified
They have not done
of building turret-ships as
they have arranged their guns
form and character as
turrets,
so
we have
in batteries as novel
and
in sucli matters
B
2 "
as
ram bows,"
^'
Chap.
of Iron-Clads.
Varieties
I.
" internal shrouds,"
pink sterns,"
"crane catheads," and other devices (the
names of
which must sound oddly in the ears of non-nautical readers), the French have gone to lengths which our designers have never thought
of approaching.
The'
Russians have built iron-clads even more various than those of France
a very mixed
;
the Prussians have already obtained
fleet
of such ships
much
ships that differ almost as ships to differ
the Italians have
;
as
it
is
possible for
neither the Austrian, the Turkish, nor
;
the Spanish ships are severely uniform in character
;
the Dutch are building ships of very opposite descrip-
and the Americans have not only given to the world a new type in the monitor, but have secured a
tions
;
renown
specific
for
formances of the
'
broadside iron-clads in the per-
New
Ironsides,'
and have displayed
the fertility of their invention in the construction of
the Stevens' battery and the ship (which
now
re-named the
'
Dunderberg,' the latter
'
belongs to the French, and has been
Rochambeau
')
being perhaps the most
singular sea-going iron-clad yet built.
The
earliest
European
iron-clads
—the
French and
English floating batteries built during the Crimean
war
—were
fact,
without pretensions as
nothing " ship-shape
"
ships,
having, in
about them, and being mere
floating forts designed for the attack of land batteries,
and not
for
sea service
;
I shall
therefore disregard
them in noticing the various types of iron-clad vessels. The first examples of real iron-clad ships were La Grloire,' in France, and the Warrior,' in England, neither of which presented any great departures from the forms and appearances of ordinary ships unless '
'
—
Chap.
Varieties
I.
of Iron-Clads.
3
the sullen, low-browed, graceless aspect of entitles lier to
was the
*
some
Warrior
'
La
Gloire
Nor
distinction in this resjoect. in
'
'
any marked degree a ship of
singular appearance except in point of
She was a
size.
masted and rigged
long, fine, handsome-looking frigate^ as usual,
and formed with a bow and stern
diifering
from the bows and sterns of the most recent
and beautiful wooden sister ship, the
be the
to
'
The
frigates.
in
Warrior
'
'
no way and her
Black Prince,' were, however, destined
only English iron-clads embodying those
forms and appearances which had come to be regarded as the *
most favoured
Bellerophon,' the
'
traits of
The
beauty in a ship.
Penelope,' and the
'
Lord Warden,'
by short curved knees
have their stem-lines relieved
;
but these diminished adornments are rather the last
examples of the vanishing type of naval architecture than indications of a return to are
now
built
it.
with stems approaching the upright above
was
water, and this style, which first, is
is
so
much
decried at
rapidly winning for itself aesthetic sanctions.
already not an
bow,
All British iron-clads
uncommon
like that of the
*
It
thing to hear a modern
Hercules,' for example, preferred
even in point of appearance
to the
Warrior's.'
'
Like
changes of style and preference have materially affected the sterns of our iron-clads, and for very good reasons.
The bow has been modified overhanging weight,
increase
to
and surmount waves, and purposes.
The
in order to dispense w^ith
to
its
adapt
fitness to cleave it
stern has been modified
for
ramming
in
order to
give protection to the rudder-head, to deflect raking shot,
and
to render
it
of following waves.
more It is
fit
to receive easily the
not to
l)e
blows
doubted, however,
that both
bows and
Chap.
of h^on-Clads.
Varieties
4
I.
having attained
sterns are far from
ultimate and settled forms.
In discussing the varieties of our iron-clads,
just
it is
and necessary that an honest discrimination between It has radical and minor changes should be exercised. been too much the habit
to cast discredit
upon our
ship-
construction on account of minor modifications, which, instead of being, as has been represented, evidences of
change of plan and purpose, have, in
For example,
of a proper persistency in these respects. it
been proofs
fact,
has of late been a steadily observed object in the
construction of broadside iron-clad ships to extend as
much by
as possible the horizontal range of the guns, both
increasing the training of individual guns and
placing guns in ports so situated as to facilitate
and stern
Even
by
bow
wooden ships this was always deemed an im23ortant object, and often led to the
fire.
in the days of
over-burdening of fine bows and sterns with
chase guns that seriously strained and weakened the ships.
In the
'
Warrior
'
and
'
Defence
bow
attempt whatever was made to get any fire
from guns placed behind the armour
years great
efforts,
cessful efforts, this
and, I
am
classes
'
no
or stern
but of late
;
glad to say, very suc-
have been made in
direction.
this
If
had not been done, and the Constructors had been
content with broadside
fire
only, they
might have
escaped a very large part of the extravagant censure
by which the followed.
On
first trial
by the simultaneous ports cut
^
Research's
for
off their
firing
of
'
guns was
or two and a
that occasion a lantern
few cups were shaken
in
of the
hooks and all
forward and stern
the fire
broken
heavy guns only
;
and
— Chap.
tliis
of Iroii-Clads.
Varieties
I.
incident,
slig'ht
was
in tlie ship,
at
5
which argued no defect whatever once so represented and exagge-
rated in one or two newspapers that the ship to be a perfect wi^eck.
Complaints scarcely
vagant have heen made other vessels
;
at
was
said
less extra-
A^arious times respecting
but in spite of
opposition the broad-
all
side
system has been extended and improved, until in
the
ships
round has
of the
fire,
Invincible
'
a
class,
'
commanding every point
been attained from within an
perfectly all-
of the
horizon,
elevated
armour-
Of
plated battery at the middle of the ship.
careful steps towards this
course
progress by small
has been found desirable to
result,
rience being continually directed
the
it
and
of expe-
light
upon the path by
To
which the advance has been made.
the ordinary
eye these successive modifications have, no doubt, appeared to indicate an absence of settled purpose the simjole truth
is,
that in
;
but
these changes one course
all
has been steadily pursued, and those progressive trials
and improvements have been made which in a few short years have brought about the complete fulfilment of the wishes of our sailors in this respect.
example
it
will be seen
loosely accuse the
plans
;
how
unfair
it
From
this
for people to
is
Admiralty of undue variety in their
and examples of a
like
same caution, might be largely
kind, enforcing the
multijolied.
There have, however, undoubtedly been a few decided changes of plan and purpose since the built.
new
The
—neglecting
chief of these
^
Warrior
and
sidered hereafter
*
Devastation,'
— are the
which
followin*;-
:
was
in this place the
ships of the monitor type, such as the
'Thunderer,'
'
'
Glatton,'
will
be con-
Chap.
Varieties of IroJi-Clads.
6
i.
The Warrior was armoured at the middle only, both bow and stern, and consequently the rudder-head '
'
and steering-gear were exposed sides
;
—in
which have been recently central or "box" battery has been
in later ships
designed —
to shot within thin iron
this
all
associated with a continuous belt of
from stem to
armour extending
and protecting the region of
stern,
the.
water-line and the steering-gear, the counter of the ship
being carried down below the water in order to further This last improvement, like
screen the rudder-head.
many
wholly due to the Controller of the
others, is
Navy, now Sir Spencer Eobinson The Warrior's armour was of uniform thickness :
'
'
over the whole of the protected broadside
over the most vital parts
ships,
the water-line and in
armour in
wake
—such
;
in recent
as the region of
of the fighting decks
—the
thicker than on the less important parts, and
is
some ships increased protection has been given
the region of the water-line
and iron bulkheads
The Warrior '
battery guns side
fire
;
by
fitted inside
additional teak backing, :
possessed only broadside
'
to
fire
from her
the later vessels have had their broad-
all
supplemented by
bow
fire
and stern
greater or less extent, as already explained
fire
of
:
The Warrior had only a main-deck battery armour'
plated
'
recent ships have had a protected upper-deck
;
them The Warrior was designed to carry a considerable number of guns in an outspread battery; later ships
battery given to
:
'
'
have been
built to carry a concentrated battery of
much heavier guns The Warrior and
very
:
'
'
'
Minotaur
'
classes
were made
— Chap.
of Iro7i-Clads.
Varieties
I.
'
extremely long, with a view to speed
7
;
recent ships
have been made very much shorter in proportion
The
^
Warrior
was designed with Y-formed
'
verse sections for a great length
bow
the
at
:
translater
;
ships have been formed with sections of a U-shape
The form
of stem given to the
'
Warrior
'
:
has been
departed from in recent ships, as previously explained.
The above changes have undoubtedly
resulted for the
most part from radical differences of view between the constructors of the ships
Warrior
'
and those of recent
but tliey are also due in part to the progress
;
made
'
armour and guns carried by war
in the
The armour
This progress has been rapid and great. of the '
'
Warrior
BellerojDhon's
the
*
Hercules be
will
monitor
11 *
'
'
everywhere 4J inches thick the 6 inches, and the water-line strake of
is
'
is
is 9
;
inches; the
'
and
will also
and the new ram as a
now
Devastation,'
Pembroke Dock,
'
;
the monitors
sides
'
of the
Thunderer
have 12 and 14-inch armour,
may
be regarded
to the 'Hotspur,' will
Presuming, as we
carry 11
may roughly
for this purpose, that the resistance offered
armour
Hotspur'
building at Portsmouth and
Rupert,' which
companion ship
and 12-inch armour. do
on the
'
12 inches, and that on the turret of
the latter vessel 14 inches '
armour of the
that
inches thick,
Glatton
ships.
by single
plates to penetration varies as the square of the
thickness,*
we
shall
have
* In their last lieiiort the Iron Plate Committee observe that they "arrived " at the inference that with plates of equally good quality the resisting ])ower
" might be approximately considered prt»portioual to the squares of their " thicknesses." No doubt this law is subject to some important limitations but it is sufllcieiitly accurate for the purpose to which I have a]>plied it ;
in the text.
Varieties
For
tlie
strengtli of the Warrior's
„
Chap,
of Iron-Clads. armour
Belleropbon's
about
..
Hercules' (belt)
Hotspur's Glatton's and Thunderer's 12-inch
Glatton's (turret)
and
Thunderer's
14-inch
\
\
i,
— '
Chap.
Varieties
I.
of Iron-Clads.
the war-slii^^s previously built.
which followed the *
Defence
much
'
class
'
\Varrior,'
and the
'
smaller dimensions,
sacrifices
The was
Hector
'
'
9
Minotaur
still
class
'
class,
The
larger.
were
built
on
but in both classes great
were made in consequence, and notwithstand-
ing these sacrifices neither of these ships
fell
much
The design of the Enterprise opened the way to the production of much smaller seagoing iron-clads. This vessel was of less than 1000 tons burden, and yet was armoured all round at the water-line, carried heavier guns than any other vessel of her date, and was of moderate draught of water. This combination of qualities in a vessel so small was obtained by means of various novel arrangemeuts 4000
below
tons.
*
such, for instance, as a battery standing
upper deck
—and
these novelties added, of course, to
the variety of our ships. ever,
by any
up above the
It
cannot be doubted, how-
intelligent person that the novelties so
introduced, while adding to the variety, added also in a
most important degree
which demands tinually
to the efficiency of a
navy upon
for small ships as well as large are con-
and properly made from every quarter of the
globe.
The
introduction of twin-screws, and the desirability
of adding to the light draught,
Navy
have
likewise has the desire
one
—
to
a few ships of comparatively
also led to further differences.
So
—a very proper and })raiseworthy
abandon the use of wood
in iron-clad
ships.
Causes like these, taken in conjunction with those previously named, have justifiably and advisedly introduced considerable variety into our iron-clad
fleet.
It
cannot
be doubted, however, that the greatest cause of variety
TO
of Iron-Clads.
Varieties
Chap.
I.
was the resort, some years ago, to tlie enormous lengths of 380 and 400 feet in the ships of the 'Warrior' and been found
It has
'Minotaur' classes respectively.
necessary to abandon these extreme lengths of hull for reasons which will be discussed so fully hereafter that it
is
unnecessary to dilate upon them here; and
consequently
it is
sufficient to direct the reader's attention
to the facts of the case. It is
most necessary
the ships of a fleet
is
to observe next that variety in
not attended by unfitness to act
together to any such extent as
The primary
represented. respect
about equal speed under
often supposed
navy
into squadrons of
steam.
full
moderate
If a
speed only, say 12 knots, had been aimed at in our sea-going iron-clad, the
'
and
object to be attained in this
that of grouping a
is
is
Warrior,'
first
would have been
it
quite easy to have secured an equal speed for all sub-
sequent iron-clad frigates s]Deed of
10 knots to
all
;
and by giving a uniform
smaller iron-clads, the entire
iron-clad fleet
would have comprised but two
of vessels, as
regards steaming capability.
enormous speed of 14 knots was aimed in the
very
'
at
classes
But the
and secured
Warrior by means of her large dimensions and '
fine lines,
and the tendency ever
since has been to
approach this speed as nearly as possible in most of our
armoured
frigates.
more than
to
any
It is to this circumstance,
other,
that
the differences
speeds of our iron-clads are to be attributed. hereafter refer capabilities state
more
fully to the subject of the
of these vessels
;
but
it
may
perhaps of the I shall
steaming
be proper to
here that, with a few exceptions, our iron-clad
frigates
have attained speeds of 13 knots and upwards.
Chap.
of IJ^OJi-Clads.
Varieties
I.
ii
and that the smaller armoured vessels have in most exceeded 10 knots.
Hence
it
cases
ajipears that notwith-
standing the differences of speed which do undoubtedly exist in our iron-clad navy,
it
is still
quite possible to
group the ships in squadrons, the larger of which, under judicious management, could proceed paratively high
speed even
when
com-
at a
the sjDeed of the
squadron was determined by that of the slowest ships in
it.
But the is
be
which should be
fact
clearly pointed out
may
that, great as the differences in point of speed
when
the engines of
maximum
their
all
power, and
our iron-clads are exerting all their
bottoms are clean,
these differences are not greater than
are not so great as result
—those
—
in truth, they
differences of speed
which
from secondary causes, such as differences in the
quality of coal, in the stoking, in the
management
of
the engines, and in the degree of foulness of the bottom.
Of course •
it is
latter differences, of
may
moment suggested that these however common occurrence they
not for a
be, justify a disregard of uniformity in the design
of ships
;
but
it
is,
nevertheless, the fact that the dif-
ferences of performance in our iron-clads at sea,
which
have hitherto resulted iTom these secondary causes, have proved abundantly
sufficient
to
neutralise
the
inherent differences in the qualities of the ships themselves.
Many
illustrations of this fact
from the various
trials of the
might be taken
Channel Squadron
a few cases will suffice for our present purpose.
;
but
On
November, 186G, a full-speed trial of the six following frigates (with two or three smaller ships which I need not notice) was ordered, viz., the
the 1st of
—
—— Chap.
of Iron-Clads.
Varieties
12
I.
Lord only with a was smooth, The sea Clyde,' and Ocean.' slight swell, and the wind light, so that there was '
Achilles/
Bellerophon;
'
'
Caledonia/
'
Hector,'
'
'
nothing in the external circumstances to prevent the several ships from doing their best,
proportionate
to,
if
somewhat
On
their measured-mile trials.
had performed
as follows
and obtaining
less than, the results of
the measured mile they
:
Speed in Knots.
Indicated Horse-Power.
5722 6521 4552 3256 6064 4244
Achilles
Bellerophon Caledonia
Hector
Lord Clyde Ocean
On
a full-speed
trial,
results
....
14^3_
....
14^^
....
12 y%
..
..
12y3-
..
..
13^-%
..
..
12^
under similar external circum-
stances, if their bottoms
were equally
and the
clean,
performances of their boilers and engines equally good, they should have stood in the same order
;
but their
bottoms were not in a similar condition, and the performances of their boilers and engines were so extremely different that the results of the squadron trial differed
excessively from the
lows
other
results,
and were as
fol-
:
Indicated Horse-Power
5786 4156
Achilles
Bellerophon
..
..
4597 2102 4852 3997
Caledonia
Hector Lord Clyde
Ocean
may
In order that the reader
Speed
in Knots.
11 ^^ 10 10
13 11
readily compare the
performances of these six vessels on the two occasions
above referred trials in the
to, I
have arranged the results of the
following order
:
Chap.
I.
Varieties
of Iron-Clads.
13
;
Varieties
14
Chap.
of Iron-Clads.
I.
The ^Caledonia's' engines developed about the same power on both the measured-mile and sea trials
trial.
but the speed obtained on the measured mile exceeded
by more than a knot and a half
that obtained at sea
and
as
she
a copper-bottomed vessel, this can be
is
The
accounted for in part only by foulness of bottom. *
Hector
fell
'
developed but two-thirds of her power, and
short of her full speed by nearly 1\ knots.
On
the
measured mile she obtained, with reduced power, 10^ knots, with but 1790 H.-P.
2102 H.-P.
so that with
;
she ought to have approached 11 knots on the squadron trial
;
and the deficiency of a knot from
this speed
probably due, for the most part, to foulness.
was The
Lord Clyde developed but four-fifths of her full power, and yet attained nearly to her full s|)eed, losing nothing from foulness. The Ocean's power on the sea trial '
'
'
'
also closely
measured fell
approached the amount developed on the
mile,
and yet her speed,
much more below her
like the
Caledonia's,'
'
speed than was to be
full
expected in the case of a copper-bottomed ship.
The foregoing ness of bottom
power introduced engaged in
this
show
facts
and
clearly
enough that
development of steam-
deficient
into the performances of the frigates trial far
greater differences than ex-
isted in the inherent qualities of the ships.
maximum vessels, we
at the
the
find that the difference
whereas on the sea
trial the
knots slower than the its best,
less
the
Looking
(or measured-mile) performances of in speed of
the fastest and slowest of these six ships
'
foul-
Achilles
'
'
'
Hector
Achilles.'
and
'
'
is
;
;
was nearly 3^
When
each ship did
Bellerophon
than a quarter of a knot
2 knots
'
differed
by
but on the squadron
— Chap.
Varieties of Irou-Clads.
I.
15
At
a clifFerence of nearly 1\ knots existed.
trial
greatest
sjjeeds
differed
by but
the sea trial the 2 knots
was
''
the little '
Caledonia
'
Now
^
Caledonia
'
but on
;
Caledonia '
'
by
Ocean
on both
trials
special remark.
made in 26th November, 18G7. The
us turn to another sea
let
'
The performance of the
so similar to that of the
no
beat the
'
their
Lord Clyde
more than half a knot
Lord Clyde
an hour.
as to require
and
'
^
smooth water, on the
trial, also
seven large frigates tried on this occasion were the ^Acliilles,' '
'
Minotaur
'
Bellerophon,' ^Lord Clyde,' ^Lord T^'arden,' (flag-ship),
'
Prince Consort,' and Warrior.' '
The flag-ship averaged lly^ knots per hour for the eight hours of the trial, and her engines gave an average of 5G29 H.-P. The results of the trial for the seven ships were as follows
:
Indicated Horse-Power.
Achilles
Bellerophon
Lord Clyde Lord Warden Minotaur
..
Prince Consort
..
Warrior
The
..
..
5688 5092 3822 4472 5629 3721 4752
'
Lord Clyde,' on
V2.q^*
....
11 ^^^
....
10-^^
....
12*
....
llyt_
....
Hy^*
....
12
full-speed performances of the
rophon,' and
Speed in Knots.
....
*
Achilles,'
'
Belle-
their measured-mile trials
have been given above, and those of the remaining four vessels are given in the following statement, the results * These speeds dilTer materially from those given by the common log, and recorded at page 8 of the rarliamentary Return, Ko. 128, " Xavy (Channel
dated March G, 1868, which are obviously a little in error in several but it has only been thought desirable to correct them in the three cases where the errors were considerable. It will be seen by the diagrams between pages 8 and 9 of the lieturn that the Achilles' steamed about 20,686 Fleet),"
cases
;
'
Lord Warden
Prince Consort 3349 yards, more than the flag-shij), in the 8 hours so that their average si>ced must have exceeded hers (lly'g knots) by l^^o, 1% and j% of a knot resjjectively.
yards, the
'
'
11,125 yards, and the ;
'
'
of
Chap.
Varieties of Iron-Clads,
i6
tlie latest
measured-mile
trials
(made
in 1868) being taken in the cases of the
'Warrior':
'
at Stokes
I,
Bay
Minotaur' and
;'
Chap.
of Iroii-Clads,
Varieties
I.
17
So great were the differences of performance introduced by different degrees of foulness, differences of different
coal,
developments
secondary causes, *
the
that
Minotaur,' was reduced almost
and the
'
by four
and
power,
of
ship
fastest
down
of
other
all,
the
to the slowest
Lord Warden,' which should have been beaten ships,
was beaten by one only, she herself Minotaur,' which ought to have
greatly beating the
'
beaten her by nearly a knot an hour. I
have dwelt upon
some length, because
this point,
and
illustrated
very important that
it is
it
it
at
should
be thoroughly understood that even the most perfect uniformity in the steaming qualities of our iron-clad frigates at their to
result
ordinary
maximum
powers, would
fail
altogether
uniform performance at sea with only
in
management
as
regards the
engines
and
so forth
boilers, fuel, state of ship's bottom,
that, after all
that has been said about
and ;
want of
formity in the designs of our armoured ships,
it
and uniwill
obviously be futile to look in that direction only for a
guarantee of uniformity of performance and of steaming qualities.
were
If I
to discuss, in like
which uniformity of
sailing performance
secondary influences, that the same facts
be necessary to of the
'
Pallas.'
this ship
manner, the extent
it
illustrate this
hold.
It will
only
by a single example, that
witnessing the performances of
under canvas
(in
18GG) for a long period,
Rear- Admiral Yelverton reported of of Admiralty as follows " sailing,
to
disturbed by
would be quite easy to show
and principles
i\ fter
is
:
—
'^
On
all
whether on a wind or going
lier to
the Board
occasions of trialfree, the
^
Pallas
8
'
Varieties
1
of Iron-Clads.
Chap.
l.
" proved herself far superior to the rest of the squadron. ''
Her power
" I '^
may
of going to
windward
is
extraordinary.
.
.
some
safely class her, in point of sailing, with
of our good 36-gun frigates of other days."
Rear-
command
of the
Admiral AYarden, then
second
squadron, also placed her
in order of sailing capa-
first
although
1867, however,
In
bility.
in
the
ship
undergone no change in herself (beyond having
had
some
of her running gear strengthened), her performance
under canvas was extremely bad, and Rear-Admiral
Warden
reported that ''the 'Pallas' was 'nowhere,'
" from inaUlity
do more.'' *
to
It is obvious, notwith-
standing this falling off in performance, that, as the
"ability" of the ship could not have changed, her bad
performance must have been due to secondary causes,
having nothing whatever sailing trials
which the
made by
to
do with her design.
The
the Channel squadron in 1868, of
particulars are given in
Report, show that the
'
Pallas
'
Admiral Warden's
again took a high place,
and prove the accuracy of the opinion here expressed. It is
unnecessary to dwell longer on this aspect of
the subject. variety
of
It is
design
plain that, whatever
embodied
the principal differences in
in
may
be the
our iron-clad
fleet,
the performances of the
ships at sea are due to other causes
;
and that
uni-
formity of steaming and sailing performances cannot be secured by the designer alone.
and
'
Lord
drawings,
(31yde
'
are just alike
The
'
— built
Lord Warden from the same
supplied with boilers and engines
same power, armoured
to the
The
italics
of the
same extent, and yet we
Chap.
of Iron-Clads.
Varieties
I.
19
have seen how differently they have steamed under the same circumstances.
may
It
at sea
be certainly
concluded, therefore, that the practical differences be-
tween our
much
of
ships, as regards
less
steaming and sailing, are
importance than has been represented,
and that great inducements
exist for us to
can to secure uniformity in our our use of steam
;
and
do
we
all
our stoking, and
fuel,
also to keejo the bottoms of our
ships as clean as possible.
This
very important subject, and points a more careful training of
to the necessity of
our
all
unquestionably a
is
officers,
but more
especially of the engineer officers of the fleet. I
have already intimated, in an
chapter,
to a non-progressive it
subject.
view, to be preferred
uniformity.
Before closing this
is,
in
will be well to revert to this aspect of the
Let us take as an illustration the very im-
portant quality of power to sea-going iron-clad, the in a
'
ram an enemy.
Warrior,' possessed
very minor degree.
She
is
not,
stood, wholly unfit to act as a ram.
well-built iron sliip
striking an '
Warrior
pro-
my
gressive improvements
chapter,
earlier part of this
that variety of design resulting from
'
it
The
first
quality
tliis
should be under-
Any
strong and
would deliver a formidable blow
enemy at even a moderate speed but is much more than an ordinary ship in ;
in
the this
respect, having a massive solid forged ram-stem, well
supported by bulkheads and frames, worked within elegant Ivuee-of-the-liead,
expressly
to
adapt her for
delivering a destructive blow upon an enemy.
more recent bows have varied largely and tageously from the to
ram more
'
lier
Still,
advan-
Warrior's,' in order to adai)t tlicm
efficiently, as will
be shown
furl
c 2
her
011
;
;
20
Varieties
and, what
is
Chap.
of Iron-Clads.
even more important to
ment, the proportions of the
wholly departed from in order
'
my
present argu-
Warrior
'
have been
to secure that quality of
handiness in which the 'Warrior'
is
and
so deficient,
which
is
ram.
Whether the proportions of such
'
I.
indispensable to the effective use of a ship as a
Bellerophon and
*
'
to those of the
'
Hercules
ships as the
are, or are not, superior
'
Warrior and
Minotaur for steaming
'
'
'
purposes will be fully considered in a later chapter
but that they are superior for
The
not admit of a doubt. respect,
ramming purposes
does
variation introduced in this
and the further variation of giving ram-ships
the advantage of a balanced rudder are causes of
between early and
difference
doubt land
;
but
if
in
it
recent
would have been an
iron-clads,
evil thing for
no
Eng-
the next naval action her iron-clad fleet
had consisted of Warriors and Minotaurs only, and had comprised none of those stout and handy
which
are, I believe,
among
tive part
vessels
capable of playing a most destruc-
The actual due much more
a hostile squadron.
duction of this improvement
is
introto Sir
Spencer Robinson, the Controller of the Navy, than to
any other person and the foresight and persistency with which he carried this change through will never ;
be more fully a|)preciated than in the hour of action, should that unhappily arrive.
Uniformit}'^ in our fleet
would have been dearly purchased this great
The
at the
expense of
improvement.
modifications which the structure of the hulls of
our iron-clads has undergone constitute another cause of variety, which, if mere variety be objectionable, are
open
to
censure, but
which bear
to
my
mind a very
Chap.
of Iron-Clads.
Varieties
I.
different
21
This remark applies both to the
aspect.
materials of which the hulls have been composed and to the disposition
and distribution of
tliose materials.
There never has been a doubt in the minds of the Constructors of the
Navy
respecting the superior value of
iron as the material of construction for such ships, and
the present Controller of the
Navy
has adopted iron to
the utmost extent compatible with other circumstances,
and long
work
of
abandoned wood altogether as the frame-
since
new
readiness and
The only reason wood has been found in
constructions.
building iron-clads in
for
the
economy with which they could be pro-
duced either out of existing wood ships or out of stocks of timber provided in the days of
wood
has been
upper-works of the
alleged
that
the
iron
ships.
But
it
wood and iron upper works of the Pallas,' and the compound or double armour of the 'Lord Warden' and 'Lord Clyde,' are examples of want of uniformity and consistency of purpose on *
Enterprise/ the combined '
the part of the Admiralty and
its officers.
This view
The 'Enterprise' (a small vessel of less than 1000 tons) was the first partially armoured wooden vessel, and it was deemed very is
not,
however, accnrate.
desirable to render the construction of so small a vessel
available as an experimental trial of the practicability
of combining fire-proof iron upper works with
wooden bottom of such
vessels.
succeeded remarkably well
—
so well that all the largest
wood-built iron-clads of the built
with iron upper works.
of those experiments which
repeat until
its
practical
the
This experiment has
it
French navy are now But it was precisely one
was very undesirable
to
success or failure bad been
22
of Iron- Clads.
Varieties
Chap.
I.
by a prolonged trial at sea, and consequently tlie plan could not with security be adopted, and therefore was not adopted, in the Pallas,' except in the immetested
'
where an iron side The plan was not applicable to
diate vicinity of the battery gnns,
was
indispensable.
the
converted ships
'
Repulse,'
down
the
'
Zealous,'
'
Eoyal Alfred,' and
without too large an outlay for cutting
wooden upper works
repeating the
'
Enterprise
'
;
and the necessity
system in
still
for
later vessels
Navy
has fortunately disappeared altogether from our
by the general adoption of iron in the construction The adoption of an inner thickness of of iron-clads. armour in the Lord Warden and Lord Clyde was '
'
'
'
the most obvious and common-sense method of increas-
ing the defensive powers of those ships, after their 4i-inch armour had been provided, and
when
the pro-
gress of other navies rendered some increase necessary.
In
all
these respects, therefore, the variety of system
adopted has been the result not of fluctuating pur230ses, but of steady and determined progress where progress
was
all-important.
The chapter which
upon
will follow
the structure of iron-clads will show, I believe, that the same thing is true of the successive modifications which the iron hull has undergone in successive ships.
There
is
one other consideration connected with the
variety of our armoured ships which appears to
worth the attention of the
way
in
officers
In the old days,
be fought under
sail,
main
when
to account
actions
and when ships of a
alike, the limits
well
—the
of the
which that variety may be turned
in time of war.
in the
me Navy
had
to
class
were
within which the
arts,
the resources, and the audacities of the
Navy were
;
Chap.
Varieties
I.
restricted brilliant
of Iron-Clads,
were really very narrow
were
its
achievements
!
;
23
and
yet
how
cannot but believe
I
that, if the English iron-clad fleet were now to be engaged in a general action with an enemy's fleet, the
very variety of our ships
—those
very improvements
which have occasioned that variety
—would be
at once
the cause of the greatest possible embarrassment to
tlie
enemy, and the means of the most vigorous and diversified attack upon the hostile fleet. This is peculiarly true of
all
those varieties which result from increase in
handiness, in
and unless
I
bow fire, in height of port, and so forth have mis-read our naval history, and mis-
appreciate the character of our naval officers of the
present day^ the nation will, in the day of the full benefit of these advantages.
trial,
obtain
1
A rmour of the Iro?i- Clads.
24
CHAPTER
c h ap.
1
II.
ARMOUR OF THE IRON-CLADS. I
HAVE already
briefly alluded to the different
our iron-clad ships
more
;
hulls of
in this chapter I propose to deal
with this subject, and
fully
modes of
armour upon the
distributing or disposing the
that have been gradually
made
armour carried by various
to trace the additions
to the thickness of the
ships.
In order to add to
the interest of the division, I shall also give similar
information respecting some armoured ships of other countries.
When
the
iron-clad s
first
were constructed, the most
powerful guns carried by our ships of war consisted of the old smooth-bore 95-cwt. 68-pounders, and the 4|-inch
armour-plating which was employed
w^as,
when
pro-
perly backed and supported, capable of withstanding the
of these
fire
This
guns.
thickness
of armour,
backed in various ways, forms the protection of a large
number of our
iron-clads,
the iron-built ships *
Minotaur
'
class
;
first
in
having been adopted in
all
constructed, except those of the
all
the converted ships of the
'Caledonia' class (except the 'Royal Alfred
were altered from
'),
which
line-of-battle ships and in all the armoured corvettes and smaller vessels yet completed.
In the
first
'
Achilles,'
'
Valiant
'
iron ships '
Defence,'
;
—the '
'
Warrior,'
Resistance,'
'
'
Black Prince,' Hector,'
and
—the 4^-inch armour was backed by 18 inches
Chap.
A rmoiir of the Iro7i
II.
-
CIads.
of teak fitted outside the iron hull
15
and
;
in the
wood
armour was bolted on outside the planking
ships the
of an ordinary line-of-battle ship, being consequently
backed by about 30 inches of timbering and planking. In the ships of the
'
Minotaur
increased in thickness to
'
class,
5^ inches;
the armour
but
having 18 inches of teak backing, as in the
and the other
shijDs
was
instead of '
Warrior,'
enumerated above, there was only a
thickness of 9 inches
;
so that practically the sides of this
class of vessel are of the
same strength
as the
portions of the Warrior' and Defence.' It '
'
armoured
was long sup-
posed, in consequence of certain experiments at Shoe-
buryness, that the increase of armour and decrease of wood
backing in the '
Warrior
'
Minotaur
'
class,
'
class, as
compared with the
had resulted
in a considerable reduction
strength.
This, however, ultimately
in shot-resisting
proved to be incorrect, the error having arisen from a
change in the strength of the powder employed.*
In
* " The Minotaur target differed from the Warrior mainly in the " reduction of its wood backing, and in an increase of equivalent weight in " the armour. A single layer of 9-inch teak and armour-plates 5] inches " thick were used in this, the frames and skin-jilating remaining ahout the '* same. For a long time it was supjiosed that this target had proved much " inferior to that of the Warrior,' and there were not wanting persons to *' publicly, and strongly and repeatedly, censure the departure that had been " made from the 'Warrior' system. I must confess that I was never able to " join in that censure myself, and when it became my duty to consider, with " the Controller of the Navy and his officers, how the Bellorophon might " best be built in this respect, we ventured to adhere to the reduced thickness " of wood backing and the increased thickness of armour, notwithstanding the " outcry against them. I am happy to be able to state what, jterhaps, many " gentlemen present may not yet have heard (for it is ill news that flies apace, " and not gootl news), viz., that all the gloomy and disparaging comparisons "which were drawn between the 'Warrior' and 'Minotaur' targets liavo " recently proved to be in error, it having been discovered that what is known "as '2 A' powder was used with two out of the three rounds of 150 Ihs. *
'
'
'
*
*
" cast-iron
s])herical shot
which were
fired
from the lOa-inch gun,
'
at
the
'
Chap.
Armoitr of the Iron-Clads,
26
ii.
Lord Clyde and Lord Warden,' the armour is in some places 4J-inch and in others 5 J-inch, worked outside a wooden hull of about the same thickness as the the
'
'
'
converted ships of the
Caledonia
'
class
'
power of the
to increase the resisting
;
but in order
ship's side,
and
especially to prevent the entrance of shells (which are so destructive to wood-built ships), a skin of 1^-inch
worked behind a large part of the 4^-inch armour, between the outside planking and the timbers. iron
By
is
this
trated
means the
made
is
total thickness of iron to
be pene-
equal 6 inches over a considerable
to
part of the area of the armoured side.
The frames
of
these two vessels, although no thicker than those of the ships of the out,
'
Caledonia
'
class,
are
made
solid
through-
and are consequently much stronger.
In the Bellerophon,' the armour-platiug
is
'
and the teak backing 10 inches
thick, while the
effi-
presented by the ship's side
target
ciency of the
6 inches,
is
greatly increased by having the skin-plating 1^ inch thick, or nearly
vessels
1
inch thicker than in the iron-built
which preceded
of the construction
is
her.
Another important feature
that outside the skin-plating, and
" ' Minotaur target, the effect of using this powder having been to raise the " striking velocity of the shot from 1,G20 feet to 1,744: feet per second. The " change in the powder was made (I know not how or why) immediately '
" after the first round, and invalidated all the comparisons that were made " in and after the report of the trial, 'ilie ' Minotaur,' Agincourt,' and " Northumberland,' are now known to possess much greater strength than " has been supposed, and are in all probability at least equal to the ' Warrior '
'
" in tliat respect. When the great cost of these large ships and the time " which has been required for building them are considered, it must be highly " satisfactory to the country to learn that no mistake was made in designing " their armour, and that they are really as stout and strong as their designers " proposed." cides''
— From a Paper On
Targets, read
the 'Bellerophon,''
by the Author
reprinted in extenso in the Author's
'
Lord Warden^ and //erNaval Architects, and '
at the Institution of '
Shipbuilding in Iron and Steel,'
p.
483.
Chap.
AmuoiLr of the Iron-Clads,
II.
between
27
planks of the wood backing, longitudinal
tlie
worked at intervals of about 2 feet, thus forming a network of framing in conjunction with the strong vertical frames inside the skin-plating, which are girders are
about the same distance apart.
This arrangement has
been proved most satisfactory as regards the support
it
adopted
gives to the armoured side, and
in
been
lias
our armour-clad ships built since the
all
The Penelope has her
*
Bellerophon.'
'
efficient
hull protected
'
'
*
Although the contrary has often been freely asserted, this arrangement from that proposed by the late Mr. Chalmers, the essential feature of which consisted of a series of loose edge plates interposed between the strakes of wood backing to the outer armour-plate, and cut off from any connection with the hull proper by means of a thin inner armour-plate backed by a few inches of wood, so that no structural strength whatever was obtained by their use. The following extract is tals.en from the Paper On the Warrior^' * Bellerophon^ and Lord Warden Targets, referred to in the foot-note on
dilYers altogether
*
'
'
p.
:—
25
"I have now to describe to you the Bcllerophon target and in order to " make the principles of its construction clear, I must mention the two points '
'
;
" in reference to which the ' Warrior and ' Minotaur targets appeared to " me susceptible of improvement. It seemed, first, that a great addition to '
*'
'
the general stability and strength of the structure might be secured if the
by other " frames of approximately equal strength, and spaced like the vertical frames ; *'
strong vertical iron frames of the ship were crossed horizontally
" and, secondly, that the risk of shot or shell passing through the structure, " between the frames, would be greatly reduced, and the resistance of the " frames
"
if
much more
effectually elicited,
wherever a shot or
the skin of the ship were considerably thickened.
shell
might
strike,
In other words,
it
" appeared highly desirable to extend, throughout the entire stmcture, that " double skin-plating, and those external frames or stringers, which had already *'
been introduced, as we saw a minute ago, in the weakened portions of the
"
—
* Warrior target. These features constitute the characteristic merits " they proved on trial to be merits of the Bellerophon target and it '
—
" pleasure to me, and not
by any means a
" germs of these improvements "
my
"
The combined
predecessors.
By
'
may
'
subject of regret, to
;
know
for
is
a
that the
be traced in the structure designed by we secure many important objects.
virtue of these
frames, connected by the an enormously strong and rigid '* structure, eminently well adapted to sustain the armour under all eirciun" stances, while both the doubled skin and the external stringers (to which " we fitted butt-.stra[»s in the Iklleroi'hon herself), increase the longitudinal
" double
skin
of
horizontal and vertical f-incli
10-inch
iron, constitute
'
'
;
A rmoitr of the Iron- Clads.
28
—near the and deck —by 6-inch armour, and
in the most vital parts
wake of the fighting " strength of
water-line,
ship to a most unusual extent.
tlie
"description of the
'
Chap,
Bellcrophon
'
target
when
It will I
complete
state that the
tlie
i i
.
in
in
general
armour was
" 6 inches thick, and the teak 10 inches ; and that, instead of forming the " external frames or stringers of a plate and two angle irons, as was done in " the ' Warrior,' we formed them of one large angle iron 10 hy 3^ inches. " You are now in a position to understand the true reasons that existed for " riveting external stringers to the outside of the Bellerophon's skin-plating, '
'
" and you cannot fail to see how little the adoption of that arrangement had " to do with the notion of giving direct support to the armour-plates. I " mention this because it has been supposed, and stated publicly on many " occasions, that these edge plates were adopted in imitation of a quite " different system, and with the view of rigidly backing up the armour. " This, however, is wholly a mistake for much as I, for one, should like " to banish the teak fiom our iion-clads, and to make their hulls of iron " throu^^hout, I am of opinion that a rigid iron backing has many disadvan" tao-cs. In fact, so far were we from valuing these edge x^lates as direct " armour supports that we caused them to be reduced in depth behind one " of the plates of the target, and to a large extent in the shi[) also, expressly " in order to keep them from too immediate contact with the armour; and <' we did so because it appeared undesirable to bring the force of a blow so " directly and fully upon that portion of the hull proper of the ship which is " immediately in front of the shot, as these plates would otherwise tend to ;
" bring it, especially if placed closer together. We put armour upon a ship to " protect the hull, which we require to preserve from the blow as effectually " as possible. A very rigid backing, in direct contact with the skin of the " ship, must obviously transfer much of the shock of a shot to that skin " whereas a moderately yielding backing allows the force to expend itself upon " the armour which is put there to receive it, and thus protects the skin from ** This is a very important point, and one upon which too its violence. *' hasty oi)inions may easily be formed. I have given the most careful con" sideration to the matter, and have seen many corroborations of the sound" ness of the views here expressed. There is one test which is easily applied,
but which is usually applied in a manner the very reverse of what it should " be. It is this wherever you see an armour-plate that is supported by close " ri^nd edge plates struck upon a line of support, you will find that the " armour-plate is comparatively but .little injured, and on removing it from its " backing, you will find that the edge plate has scored m.ore or less deeply into *'
:
Now what does this point to? To the fact of the armour-plate. " that the edge plate has been driven back with violence upon that which " supports it, viz., that very skin of the ship which you desire to preserve " the back
" intact.
If the
external frames or stringers of the
" situated within a few inches of each
'
had been have considered this
Bellerophon
other, I should
'
" circumstance so serious as to destroy all prospect of success in carrying out " the plan but with the frames 2 feet apart, it is not so, as the isolated e
Chap.
Armo7ir of the Iron-Clads,
II.
29
worked upon 10 and 11 inches of teak backing respectively. This was one of the first of our shij)s in which the device of thickening
by
the remaining portions
5-inch,
was adopted, a device which has since been extensively employed. The longitudinal girders behind the armour in t1ie Pene-
the armour on portions of the broadside
*
lope '
are similar in their arrangement to those of the
'
Bellerophon,' but there
of skin-plating.
The
is
not as great a thickness
turret-ship
'
Monarch
'
has 7-inch
armour on the most important parts of the hull, and G-ineh on the other parts, the armour being supported
by 12-inch teak backing, with a thickness of
skin-
plating (1^-inch) and an arrangement of longitudinal girders '
similar
Captain's
in
wake
'
to
those
of the
'
protection resembles the
'
of the turrets, where there
the thickness of the backing
The
Bellerophon.'
Monarch's,' except is
8-inch armour;
and skin-plating and
the arrangement of the girders are the same in both
The
ships.
and
6 -inch
ships of the
'
Invincible
'
class
have 8-inch
armour on the broadside, backed by 8 and
10 inches of teak respectively, and by l|-inch skinplating, with the usual
The
arrangement of 'girders.
thickness of armour carried has, however, for the
present, reached
ships in the
'
its
maximum
Hercules,'
for sea-going broadside
which has 9-inch armour
at the
water-line, 8-inch on the most important parts of the " plate of ^-inch iron buckles
"
1 will
up midcr
the blow before
it
can injure the skin.
only add on this head that in expressing the foregoing views
I
am
" not neglecting the consideration that closely situated edge plates must tend " greatly to distribute the blow I am well aware of that fact ; but the answer :
" to
it is
that the time allowed for distributing the force
" that so far as
they distribute
it
at
all,
is
very short, and
they distribute the blow upon and
" over the skin of the ship, which we wish to preserve, and take " purpose from the armour, which is emiiloycd exiuxssly to receiNX'
it
for
it."
that
;
!
Ainnour of the Iron-Clads.
30
and
broadside,
6-inch
on
Chap.
remainder.
the
II.
Outside
the 1^-inch skin-plating of this vessel, teak backing 12
and 10 inches thick
is fitted,
together with longitudinal
girders of the usual character.
This does not, however,
constitute the whole of her protection, for from below
down to the lower edge known as the " wing passages
the lower deck
of the armour
the spaces
" are filled in
solid is
with additional teak backing, and inside
an iron skin | inch
tical
fore, of the
most
by a
thick, supported
frames 7 inches deep.
The
this there
set of ver-
total protection, there-
vital part of the ship, in the region of
the water-line, consists of the following thicknesses of
wood
iron and
:
— Outside
armour
9 inches
then 10-
;
inch teak backing with longitudinal girders at intervals of about 2 feet, worked upon 1^-inch skin-plating sup-
ported by 10-inch vertical frames spaced 2 feet apart the
between these frames are
spaces
with teak, and inside the frames
in
filled
there
thickness of about 19 or 20 inches of teak
solid
a further
is
the whole
;
being bounded on the inside by |-inch iron plating, stiffened
iron
with 7-inch frames.
The
total thickness
(neglecting the girders and frames)
inches,
and of
thus \\\
is
this 9 inches are in one thickness
;
the teak
backing has a total thickness of about 40 inches. trial at
of
The
Shoeburyness of a target constructed to repre-
sent this part of the ship's side proved that tually impenetrable to the GOO-pounder
haps no better idea of the increase
power of the
sides of our iron-clads
it
gun
;
was
and per-
of the resisting
can be obtained than
that derived from a comparison of the 68-pounder
which the
*
Warrior's
'
side
vir-
gun
was capable of resisting with
the GOO-pounder tried against the
'
Hercules
'
target
Chap.
Armo2ir of the Iron-Clads,
II.
But
armour carried must
limit of the thickness of
tlie
31
not be considered to have been yet attained. defence vessels
are, as
I
have previously
being built to carry 11 and 12 -inch armour
stated,
new
and rams
Coast
turret-ships
'
Thunderer and '
the
;
Devastation,' lately
'
thicknesses,
and
ships have been designed for sea-going purposes,
and
designed, will carry quite
may
as
great
yet be constructed, which are to carry even 15
There can be
inches of armour.
little
doubt that, as
improvements are made in the manufacture and working of heavy guns, corresponding additions will be the resisting powers of the iron-clads built.
made
It is
to
hardly
what way the competition between guns and ships will terminate but having the ex^DCpossible to foresee in
;
we
rience
possess of the successful accomplishment of
what, only a few years ago, were regarded as impossithe construction of iron-clads,
bilities in
folly to
attempt to
it
would be
set a limit to the residts tliat will
be
The Admiralty have long been
attained in the future.
in possession of a design for a turret-ship with sides
plated with 15-incli armour, and turrets with 18-inch
armour.
I
have
also prepared outline designs, not
on
extravagant dimensions, to carry 20-inch armour, both
on broadsides and on Tlio preceding
turrets.
facts
marised as follows,
if
and figures may be
to tJie
generally a
armour and backing,
icitJtout
greater or less extent of the surface protected.
For convenience wood-built.
sum-
the ships are grouped according
to the thicknesses of their
regard
briefly
I shall divide
them
In the turret-ships little
into iron-built
tlie
turret
and
armour
stronger tlian the side aiiuour.
is
—
..
..
.
Armour
r-
Iron-built
:
Scorpion
Armour,
Backing.
Inches.
Inches.
4|
Wivcrn
Chap.
of the Iro?i-Clads.
9
II.
SkinPlating.
Inches.
M
The weakest
of
our
armour-clads.
But
Viper
.
Vixen
..
I
10
^
\\
Waterwitcli
slightly very stronger than the above.
Warrior Black Prince Acliilles
Defence Resistance
4i
18
.
Hector Valiant Prince Albert .
v^
All of equal strength to resist shot.
Agincourt Minotaur Northumberland .
51
.
The
Bclleroplion
10
Penelope
10
n
greater thickness of skin-plating in this and most of the fallowing ships is obviously equivalent to an increase in the thickness of armour.
Invincible
Audacious
Vanguard
10
Iron Duke Swiftsure
u
Triumph
—The
Note.
Invincible
'
' Penelope's' armour is only 5 inches thick on some parts of the broadside. and her consorts have 8-inch armour on the water-line belt.
Monarch
12
Captain Note. Tj
1
„
—The (
On
I
Q^
bultan
NoTK.— In
'
Captain
belt
*
1^
has 8-inch armour in wake of the turrets.
9
.
gjj^,^
the
'
The
gonorally
Hercules,'
protection of about 30 tion named above.
in the neighbourhood of the water-line, there is an additional skin, besides the belt protec-
mches of teak backed by a 5-inch iron
— Chap.
..
Annoicr of the
II.
Iroii-Clads,
Thickness of
Armour.
\VcM3d-built
Side.
:
Caledonia
Ocean
Inches-
Inches.
^\
29^
^\
30i 22 20 lOJ 19^
.
..
Prince Consort
Koyal Oak
.
Zealous Pallas
Z?>
..
Favourite Research Enterprise
Koyal Sovereign Eoyal Alfred
3G 29 i
5.«
6 G
.
Eepulse
Lord Clyde Lord Warden
31
31i
/ \
4i-
:•};
l^incli inner skin
of
ire
—
Note. In these two ships there is a strake of 5^-inch armour at the water-line, and the frame behind the armour, so that in addition to the outer and inner armour the whole thickness of the side is available to resist penetration; in all the other wood ships watei" can enter when the outside planking, which is only 8 or 10 inches thick, is penetrated. is filled in solid
The information conveyed
in the preceding
summary
of the strengths of the respective iron-clads to resist shot
illustrated in the
is
show specimen blocks
be taken as types of the various
The Kalamazoo may be taken as a specimen latest and strongest class of American monitors.
classes.
of the
number
cut out of the sides of a
may
of the ships that
accompanying woodcuts, which
'
'
After the above brief statement of the thickness of
armour carried by our own
ships,
may
it
not be un-
interesting if I give a few facts of a simihir character
with respect to the armoured vessels of the French and
American and
'
The
navies.
Solferino,''
^Gloire' class, and the ^Magenta'
have armour a
little
over 4i inches
worked upon ordinary wooden hulls. The same thickness of armour as the AVarrior's' is carried by tlie thick,
'
iron-built frigate
'
Couroiine,'
floating batteries of the
floating
batteries
are
'
and
Palestro
iron-l)uilt,
l^y '
the small wc^odeu
class; all the other
and
have
r).^-incli 1)
34
Armo7ir of the Iron-Chxds, WAFiR/OR
BE'LLST/^ o/^^oa/
Chap.
/l/0/?T/-/C//l^^£r/?Z./\
A70A/A/7CH
A/O
II.
Chap.
II.
Armour of the Iron-Clads, H^fi c ui.es'
THUrJDEftER
Strongest /American
AJoa/ztor
KALA/\7/izoo
35
— '
Armour
36
The
armour.
ram
frigates of the
'
Taureau/ have armour a
'
wooden
thick outside
hulls
;
Flandre
little less
'
The
'
and 61-inch and 4-inch on other parts Belier
'
class
4^^^
have
and 4-inch
'Marengo
Invincible
own Navy) have 7^-inch armour
of the
class
'
vessels of the
class (corresponding nearly to the
'
and the
than G inches
Alma
53^-inch armour at the water-line, and
on other parts of the hull.
class,
'
11.
while the armoured cor-
vettes or second-rate frigates of the
our
Chap.
of the IroH'Clads,
'
class of
at the water-line, ;
while the rams
have S^^-inch and 7-inch armour,
by any French vessel yet built. It may be proper to add that by far the greater number of French iron-clads are wood - built, and that the armour is simply secured outside the planking of the wooden hulls, no inner skin-plating or longitudiual the strongest carried
girders,
similar to those of the English ships, being
worked.
This fact renders the French ships weaker than
our vessels, even
when
the thicknesses of the external
armour and of the backing are equal difference
better
more
;
and
bring this
to
clearly before the reader, I cannot do
than quote from Captain Noble's 'Report on
Various Experiments carried out under the direction of the Ordnance Select Committee, &c.' " It
might appear
at
first
sight that
He
says *
:
wood backing
" would have the effect of strengthening an iron plate " the results, however, of a very large
"go
to
number of
cases
prove the opposite, namely, that the backing
" affords little, if any, support to the plate unless it be
" of the rigid form, such as the
"and
'
Chalmer,'
In other words,
Bellerophon.'
See page 36 of the Report
'
'
On
if
'
Hercules,'
a shot
the Effect of Backing to Iron Plates.'
is
Chap.
Armottr of tJie Iron-Clads,
II.
37
" capable of penetrating an unbacked 4^-inch plate, **
will perforate
" backed
it
or break
away equally
it
We
by wood alone
" however, that a rigid backing
if it
it
be
have evidence,
a great advantage.
is
"
This was particularly aj^parent in the case of the
*'
'
^'
some shot which struck with
''
penetrate
Plercules,'
" also *'
where the
plates
them completely
evidence
were not
j^crforated
sufficient
unbacked.
if
superiority
of the great
*
work
We
'
by to
have
packed
of
backing of teak, such as in the 'Warrior,' 'Minotaur,'
" &c., over the ordinary side of a line-of-battle ship, "
and of the great support which an inner skin
"
Thus
''
cumfereijce to penetrate the backing and skin of the
it
required 33 foot-tons per inch of shot's
"'Warrior,' *'
inches of compact
18
viz.
teak,
cir-
and a
and supported by iron
|-inch iron plate strengthened
" ribs;
affords.
and we see that 16 foot-tons per inch were
" sufficient to penetrate the side of an ordinary line-of'^
We
battle ship, viz. 25 inches of oak.
" the backiug of the " per inch,
" per inch.
'
Lord Warden
and of the small
'
also find that
required 58 tons
plate target about IG tons
This shows the vast su})eriority of com-
" pact backing supported
by
internal iron plates."
It
need only be added that the " small plate " target here
was constructed represent the armoured
referred fairly
of the
the
'
to
Flandre
'
class,
trial consisted in
screw
fastenings,
in such a side of a
manner French
as to frigate
although the chief interest of
the use of small plates and wood-
instead
of
tlie
through fastenings employed in our In the American navy what
is
larger
plates
and
ships.
known
as " laminated"
armour has been almost universally adopted,
tlie
pro-
Armour of the
38
tecting material being
This plan was at
first
made up
A
by the
necessitated
fact that thick
anything like
in
by the ironworks
in the country.
few ships have been constructed with
tlie
for the
most
;
part, 4^-inch
'
and the other armour.
armour,
solid
by the Roanoke,'
greatest thickness being carried
which has 5^-inch plates
1 1.
of several tliicknesses.
armour-plates could not be produced the required quantity
Chap.
Iro7i-Clads,
vessels having,
With
the exception
of these three or four vessels, the American iron-clads
have laminated armour, which the
trials
made
at Shoe-
buryness prove most conclusively to be far inferior in its
armour of the same the monitors have their armour
powers of resistance Nearly
thickness.
made up some
all
to solid
of several thicknesses of 1-inch plate, backed in
by what are termed
cases
^'
armour
stringers," or
plank armour of very small breadth and of moderate
Even when thus
thickness.
laminated armour
is
strengthened,
not to be
however,
compared with
solid
In January, 1862, the Iron Plate Committee
plates.
carried out
some experiments against targets constructed
on the laminated principle by Mr. ITawkshaw, and the results
will
Keport.*
be found in
Captain Noble's very able
Only a few experiments were made,
no exact estimate of the
so that
relative strengths of solid
and
laminated armour can be based upon them; but, as
Captain Noble observes, they show "that laminated " armour
and
is
considerably weaker than solid armour,"
that " a 4-inch solid plate
would have
effectually
" stopped all the projectiles, whereas they easily pene-
" trated 6 inches of laminated plates."
Sec page 25 of the l!epor(.
It is interesting
— Chap.
Arinour of the Iron-Clads.
II.
observe that the
to
39
law of the resistance of single
armour-l^lates varying as the square of the thickness
which law has been estabhshed by direct experiment for thicknesses up to 5^ inches, and is perhaps approximately
—
true for greater thicknesses
the comparison
is
not conformed to in
of solid and laminated armour.
For
example, a 4-inch solid plate would be sixteen times as strong against penetration as a 1-inch plate, but would
not be four times as strong as four 1-inch plates riveted together and forming laminated armour of equal thickness with the solid plate, although
be
much
it
would undoubtedly
stronger than the laminated arrangement.
In
short the multiplication of thin plates has a tendency to increase the
and
amount of
their proportionate resistance,
would be most improper
it
resistance varying as the
square of the thickness to
plate of equal thickness.* The subject
of laminated
apply the law of the
an assemblage with a
the comparison of such
*
to
At
solid
the same time there
armour came into prominence
is
also durini:c tLe
"Gibraltar" shields which was conducted in 18G7-68 by a Special Committee, whose Kejtort has since been presented to
investigation respecting
the
p. 35 of the Report) is esitecially and he gives some valuable information respecting trials made at Shoeburyness on the relative resistances of 7-inch armcur when made up of one plate, or of two or three thicknesses. He states that these resistances to penetration were in the proportions of 61, 57, and 52 the solid plate being about one-fourteenth stronger than the armour made up of two
Captain Noble's evidence (at
Parliament.
interesting on this point,
;
made up of three 2 ^ -inch plates. After giving these figures. Captain Noble remarked that " these results show " that i)lates thus built up in thick layers, bolted together, afford a very large 3^-inch plates, and one-sixth stronger than that
*'
amount
of resistance to i)erforation, although tliey are not quite equal to a
" solid plate
;"
but drew a marked distinction betw^een this arrangement and the the American monitors' armour, in which a
laminated structures, such as
number
There
of thin plates are used.
is,
no doubt, great
justice in these
opinions, although Captain Noble's final conclusion resixjcting the most favourable application of the plate-uix)n-plate system still gave the advantage to the solid
plate,
and made a 13-iuch
i)late
equal to three 5-inch plates riveted
together.
In a rai)er (published
in
volume
xvii. of the l\oyal Engineers'
'
Professional
.
A rmour of the Iron- Clads
40
c h ap.
.
and can be no question that armour-plating
more Palmers
effective in resisting
')
on
'
projectiles
much
is
when
1 1
rolled in
Experiments on Iron Armour,' Colonel Inglis has given an intemade to determine the relative resistances of solid
resting account of experiments
I use the term " built-up " in contradistinction to " lami-
and built-up armour.
nated," because the targets fired at were formed of two or three thicknesses of
5-inch plates, and such structures obviously are not at all comparable with the American laminated armour, in which plates only 1 inch thick are used.
From very
these experiments Colonel Inglis concludes that a solid 10-incli plate little,
if
is
anything, stronger than 10-inch armour formed by fastening
and that a solid 15-inch plate, while it proved than three thicknesses of 5-inch plates against a single blow, is more liable to break up extensively under repeated blows than the built-up armour. There are several points in connection with these experiments which, in my opinion, render them far from conclusive on the question at issue, but to which I cannot refer at length. One fact, however, may be mentioned as an illustratogether two 5-inch plates
;
better
tion of this remark, viz., that the 10-inch plate taken as the representative of solid
armour had been previously
fired at in testing it as
a sample, and had
been used as a target for testing Pailiser and other projectiles. Inglis himself says that " there was not clear space left on the plate
Colonel
also
" than three rounds, but where they were planted
The
it
more was quite uninjured." for
opinion here expressed with respect to the condition of the " clear space " the tremendous battering which the plate had undergone,
is one which view of our experience with armour-plates that have been subjected to the fire of heavy guns. It must be stated also that the targets experimented upon were built and fastened in a manner that could not be adopted for the side-armour of ships that the bolts connecting the three plates were not aimed at and that the trials were made exclusively to determine
left after
I cannot entertain in
;
;
the relative worth of the two systems of armour-plating as applied to land fortifications.
A
careful study of these trials, however,
armour
pression that solid
is
still
leaves the
stronger than built-up armour, even
im-
when such
considerable thicknesses as Jervois, in a paper
5-inch plates are used in the latter. Colonel on Coast Defences,' says also that " experiments have shown *
" that the resistances to penetration of thick solid plates are not so
much
greater
" than those of an equal thickness made up of several layers of comparatively " thick plates," thus indirectly confirming the opinion expressed above. For land fortifications it is more important to economise in cost than in weight of armour in ship construction this is not so and it would obvi:
;
ously be better to ai)ply the solid plates, which give greater protection in projwrtion to the Aveight. All this, be it observed, is independent of the consideration that the through fastenings of the layers of plates
must be very and that the protection would therefore suffer by the breaking of the fastenings, as was found to be the case in the actual trials both on the Hawkshaw targets and on the " Gibraltar " shields. This liability has, it is true, been since reduced by means of various devices, but these do not entirely remove it, and they could not be so satisfactoril}^ applied on a ship's side as liable to injury,
they can in a shield
for
land fortifications.
Chap.
Armoiir of the Iron-Clads.
II.
41
than wlien made up of several compara-
solid f)lates
tively thin plates
bered that the
and besides
;
and that the
impact of projectiles
wood backing
various layers of
liability to injury
thus greatly
is
fitted in the
of great thickness, but
must be remem-
employment of numerous large
thin plates requires the rivets or bolts,
this, it
connection of the
it is
monitors
The
increased. is,
in
tlie
many
cases,
not nearly so efficient as the
backing and girders of our ships
armour fastenings adopted
from
is
and the system of
;
not to be compared with
Navy.*
that of our
Keeping these
would now
in view, I
facts
invite
attention to a short statement of the thicknesses of armour
by the principal American
carried
few ships which have solid
from consideration the
armour
iron-clads, excluding
which reference has been made above) and
(to
The
the light-draught vessels built for river service. original
*
Monitor' had her hull protected by
of 1-inch plate, diminishing
five layers
4 indies and then
first to
The wood
below the water.
to 3 inches in thickness
backing was 27 inches thick, and was bolted
The next have armour of the
iron plating forming the skin of the vessels built
—the
*
Passaic' class
same thickness as the of
The
wood backing.
layers
of
stringers"
first *
—
plates
let into
27-inch
shi}).
'Monitor,' but have 30 indies
Canonicus
1-incli
'
class
have the
supported by two
wood backing,
intention
increase the strength of
of the
*
tliis
|)art
Full particulars of the various systems of armour vvell
''
neigh-
being to
side.
fastciiiii,:j;s
five
armour
in the
bourhood of the water-line, the
adopted, as
to J-inch
How
proposed aiul
as detailed information concerning the practical processes of
preparing and fixing armour-plates on the sides of ships, will be found iu chap. xxi. of
my
work ou
*
Shipbuilding in Iron and
Steel.'
' ;
Armour
4^
of the Iron-Clads.
small the increase must be will apjoear
inches broad, and, for
when
ii.
stated
it is
only narrow planks of iron
that tliese stringers are 6|-
Chap.
tlie
most
4 inches thick
part,
that they are totally unconnected with each other,
and
that the additional protection thus afforded extends in all
The Minatonomoh
over a breadth of 15 inches only.
and the
'
'
Monadnock,' which are the best-known vessels
'
of this class, owing to their ocean voyages in the Atlantic
and
Pacific, aj^pear
tected in nearly the
from American authorities
same manner '
'
six layers of 1-inch plates
on their
to
be pro-
Canonicus,' but
The Puritan and the
they are wood-built.
have
as the
'
sides,
*
Dictator
with wood
backing 42 inches thick, into which three " armour stringers " 5 inches thick are fitted near the water-line, this additional protection
In the
inches only.
'
Kalamazoo
ness of armour (6 inches) 3-inch plates, backed
extending over a depth of 25
is
'
class the total thick-
made up
of two layers of
by 30 inches of oak, the
side in the
neighbourhood of the water-line being strengthened by three armour
stringers, 8 inches broad,
which
thickness,
are
let
the
into
stringers are a few inches apart,
and of equal These
backing.
and the additional pro-
tection, including the intervening spaces, extends
over
a depth of
less
by
most formidable armour carried by American
far the
than 4
feet
ships of the monitor type,
near the water-line.
and
as representing a protection of
while in
it is
some
true that this
is
is
This
is
sometimes referred to
14 inches of iron
;
but
the total thickness of armour
parts, it is also true that in other parts the pro-
tection is limited to the
and that
in
no part
is
two thicknesses of 3-inch
plates,
the side nearly as strong as
would be when covered. with 14 inches oi
solid iron.
it
— Chap.
Arnionr of the Irou-Clads.
II.
43
The rapid diminution of tlie thickness of the armour of the American vessels is a point too frequently lost sight
of,
hecause the practical
of
effect
it is
even
to give
the largest and most powerful of the monitors next to
no protection below water. Dictator/
we
example,
we
If
take the case of the that
in
this
respect she literally bears no comparison with our
own
*
for
At
vessels.
find
shall
a distance of 2^ feet below the load water-
she has but two 1-inch plates to protect her
line,
at a distance
of 3
and
In the
but one such plate.
feet,
;
engravings on the next page I have placed a section of her armour and of the armour of the turret-ships
'
In the
side.
Thunderer '
'
and
'
new English
Devastation
side
'
by
Kalamazoo class, which are the most American vessels, the lower '
effectually plated of the
edge of the lowest block of iron backing
18
but
is
inches below the water, and at 2 feet 9 inches below
water the plating
To it
these remarks on the hull-armour of these vessels
may
The
but 3 inches thick.
is
be proper to add a few on the turret-armour.
first
'
Monitor
thicknesses
'
had the
of 1-incli
succeeded her
—the
'
Passaic,'
had eleven thicknesses. *
made up
turret
and
plates, '
the
thick,
made up
constructed, witli
vessels
The
of an inner
later ships, such as the
drum
15
turrets
inches
of four or
and an outer drum
and made up of
which
Canonicus,' and others
Dictator' and 'Kalamazoo,' have
layers of 1-inch plates,
of eight
five
similarly
five or six layers of
2')lates,
segments of wroiiglit-iron hoops, 5 inches thick,
placed between the two drums.
No wood
backing or
frames are used in the construction of these turrets. I
have thus thrown together in a brief space the
44
AnnoiLr of the Iron-Clads.
Chap.
ii.
principal facts connected with the thicknesses of armour carried by the ships of the American, French, and
British navies,
and wonld now pass
of great importance,
viz.,
to an allied topic the disposition of the armour
Chap.
Arviour of the Iron-Clads,
II.
on the
45
In our earlier iron-clads the protection
hulls.
is
only partial, extending over a portion of the length of
No
the broadside.
better
be chosen than the feet,
*
example of
system can
this
Her length
Warrior.'
and the armoured portion
380
is
only 213
is
feet
in
length, the extremities of the ship being left entirely
At
unprotected.
the ends of the armoured portion,
both before and abaft, iron-plated bulkheads are built
and enclose a central or "box" battery, of which the armour extends from the
across the ship,
on the
sides
upper deck down to a water.
more than 6 feet below By limiting the armour to the middle portion little
of the ship, the weight to be carried
can be obtained, thus rendering the to
of course, con-
bow and
siderably reduced, and very fine
high in proportion
is,
watertight compartments,
Outside the
divided into numerous
is
so
speed very
vessel's
her engine-power.
battery, the hold of the ship
stern lines
even
that,
the side
if
should be pierced, the safety of the vessel might be ensured.
The
necessity for this precaution will appear
from the consideration that length, the side
is
for nearly
170
feet of the
as penetrable to projectiles as that
of an ordinary iron ship
;
and even when
all
care has
been taken to subdivide the extremities, the rudder
head and steering apparatus are tected.
This
adopted in the
system of '
partial
Black Prince,'
'
unpro-
left entirely
protection
Defence,' and
also
is *
Resist-
ance;' but the desire to increase the amount of protection led to the introduction into the
'
Hector
'
and
'Yaliant' of a modification of the 'Warrior's' disposition of armour.
This modification consisted
a belt of plating, extending from
llie
upper
iu
adding
to tlie
main
'
46
Armour of the Ii^oU'Clads.
decks, before
and abaft the main portion of the broad-
armour,
side '
is
which was arranged similarly to
the
thus protected throughout the entire length,
but the extremities
"•
quite as unprotected
the hold
1 1.
The main deck, on which the guns arc
Warrior's.'
fought,
Chap.
between wind-and- water " are those of the
as
*
Warrior,' and
divided into numerous watertight spaces as
is
previously described.
Both these plans of disposing the armour were
after-
wards considered unsatisfactory, and resort was had the '
'
Minotaur
Caledonia
'
class,
'
class, to
and
in
in the converted ships of the
the system which had been intro-
duced into the construction of the floating batteries built during the Crimean war, by means of which what is known as " complete protection " is secured. Throughout the length the armour extends from the
upper deck down
to about 6 feet
The same system of
protection
turret-ships, except the
'
below the water-line. is
followed in
all
our
Monarch,' and the breastwork
monitors; but the upper decks of these vessels are at a considerably less height above water than those of the frigates.
The
principal advantages possessed
disposition of the
armour over that of the
are that the extremities of the ship,
and
'
by
this
Warrior
especially the
parts near the water-line, are iron-cased, and that the
protected guns can be ranged along the length of tbe
broadside instead of being concentrated in a central battery.
There
are,
however, the accompanying disad-
vantages of having the bow and stern heavily burdened,
and of requiring a great increase in the total weight of armour. For wood-built iron-clads this plan has the additional advantage of protecting the upper works .
Chap.
Amjioiir of the Iron-Clads,
II.
47
throughout the length from the destructive
The French
shells.
effects
of
ships are, for the most part, plated
in this manner, the principal exceptions being found in vessels designed within the last four or five years.
The great development in the power of ordnance, made almost simultaneously with the introduction of armour-plating, led not only to increase in the thickness of armour carried, but to changes in the system of pro-
modes of
tection, or, in other words, to different
As we have
posing or arranging the armour. the
'
Warrior
has 4i-inch armour over a limited por-
'
tion of the hull
—a
'^
patch" on each
side,
phrase which the Times once applied with to
more recent
trary
is
dis-
seen,
vessels.
The
'
Minotaur
'
use a
to
less fairness
on the con-
completely armoured from stem to stern, and
was made 20
longer than the
feet
'
Warrior
'
for the
purpose of accomplishing this result, and retaining a fine form.
The system introduced by myself,
first
in
the small sloop 'Enterprise,' and subsequently in the '
Bellerophon,'
sists
*
Hercules,' and other large ships, con-
in completing the ship's
armour
in the region of
wake of the gun-deck. In as arrangement of armour is
the water-line, but not in fact,
this system, as far
concerned, consists in taking a middle ccjurse between the 'Warrior' and line
belt to the
'
'Minotaur.'
Add
a deep water-
Warrior,' and you have the
recent arrangement
;
or take
away
the gun-deck armour
of the '^linotaur' at the ends of the ship, and
have the same thing.
more
After the
you
conversion of the
'Enterprise' was ordered, each of these measures was actually taken with ships of the classes named. 'Achilles,' a shi})
The
of the 'Warrior' class, had the water-
Armo2cr of the
48 line belt
the
'
'*
1 1.
added; and the 'Northumberland,' a ship of
Minotaur
from
Chap.
Iroii-Clads,
the
'
had the gun-deck armour omitted
class,
new plan
The
ends.
central battery
and armour
is
known
system,"
belt
the
as
pro-
the
tected guns being placed in a battery, like the Warrior's,' of which the fore and after ends are shut in by '
armoured bulkheads arrangement
of the battery are
in
By
ship.
great weight of the
the
armament length, and the
the
across
built
this
armour and
the middle
of the
extremities of the ship are not over-
loaded with an immense weight of iron as in the '
The armour
Minotaur.'
belt extends
from a few
feet
below water up to a moderate height above, usually
ending at a deck of which the beams are covered with
by means of which
stout iron plating,
the parts of the
and abaft the battery are protected against
vessel before
the effects of dropping or oblique
The
fire.
belt serves
not only as a protection to the most vital parts of the ship
but
steering apparatus
favourable
to
;
and the plan
the
armour than are concentration
a shield to the rudder-head and
as
also
is
obviously extremely
and thicker
of larger guns
use
usual, as
it
favours the contraction and
armament without
of the armour and
exposing the vital parts of the ship.
Compared with the 'Warrior's' or the Minotaur's' *
disposition of armour, the
cannot
fail to
new plan
have struck the reader, but which
not be amiss to briefly summarise the
stern,
'
Warrior
'
is
so
it
board
and though the
:
—At the
readily
certain that the water
render ;
has advantages that
ship's safety
may
bow and
penetrable
would
it
find its
as to
way
in-
might be ensured,
or at the least prolonged, by the watertight compart-
Chap.
Armoiir of tJic IroU'Clads.
II.
ments, yet
49 very serious
will not be doubted that a
it
reduction in speed would ensue, and that
The armour
it
w^ould be
prevent penetration altogether.
better, if possible, to
and by
belt does this,
also protecting the
steering apparatus supplies an important feature which
wanting in the
Warrior.'
new
is
entirely
is
compared with the system of complete protection,
exemplified
the
in
'
*
Minotaur,'
much
the former admits of a
it
If the
will
greater
plan
appear that thickness
of
armour being carried by ships of moderate dimension^j than the
It
latter.
must, of course, be obvious that
completely armoured ships can carry a larger number of protected guns than ships with partial plating
but
;
moment, as the tendency modern war ships is to increase the size and diminish the number of the guns. No more striking example of
this is of comparatively little
in
can be found than in the
Minotaur,' which
was intended to carry 20 guns a side on the main deck and carries II only, the weight of the guns carried having been increased from lOO-pounders to 6|-ton and 12-ton this
guns.
With
'
a central battery of moderate length
therefore, possible to carry as large a
guns
as
thought desirable, or at
is
would give liglit
guns
number of heavy least as
far greater offensive jiower ;
this
result
another chapter, '
Bellerophon,'
also
l)ut it
is
as,
or greater than, that of
The manner
attained will be described in
may
'Hercules,'
protected batteries
bow and
as
than numerous
the guns in a completely protected ship.
which
many
and the range of training of these large
guns can be made as great in
it is,
at
be stated here that in the
and
otlier ships,
tliere
are
the extremities iu which
stern chasers are placed, the lengths of these
E
50
Armour of the
•
Chap.
Iron-Clads,
II.
and the weight of
batteries being comparatively small,
protecting armour not so considerable
to heavily
as
burden the extremities.
An
important alteration has been made in the
position of the
armour
in the
*
Invincible
plating being continued up to
dis-
class,
'
the
such a height above
the upper deck for a portion of the length amidships as to protect four
heavy guns mounted
at the angles of
an octagonal battery, of which the ends are enclosed
by transverse iron-plated bulkheads.
These guns can
be fired in the line of the keel as well as on the broadside,
and
as they are at
such a considerable height
above water, could be fought in weather when the ports of the main-deck battery could not be opened.
Previously to the design of these vessels, the
Lord
'
Warden' and 'Lord Clyde' had been supplied with powerful armoured
bow
batteries on the
many
the later arrangement has
In their recent system
of
ships, the
complete
advantages.
French have given up the and
protection,
the central battery and armour belt.
the same arrangement, however,
two-decked
iron-clads,
upper deck, but
much
'Magenta'
have
adopted
They adopted earlier in the
and
'
Solferino/
although their frigates are mostly armoured throughout the length. class,
In their
latest ships of the
'
Marengo
'
the arrangements are of a very similar character
to those of the
'
Invincible
'
class
in our
own Navy,
there being protected batteries amidships on both the
main and upper
decks, the latter
larged horizontal range of
commanding an
en-
fire.
But few remarks are needed witli respect arrangement of the armour on American ships.
to
the
Their
1
C HAP.
A rmoitr of the Iron- Clads.
II.
broadside frigate, the
'
New
Ironsides,'
and the monitors
tially protected,
5
was only par-
are, of course, pro-
tected throughout the length from the upper deck to a
few
feet (usually
about 4 feet) below water.
down The
small amount of free-board, or height out of water, in these vessels reduces the area of the armoured surface
of the target presented
by the
shiji's
A
the weight of armour required. in weight
eftected, as before
is
and lessens
side,
further reduction
explained,
by ending
some of the layers of plating at a very small tance below water but this obviously greatly
dis-
;
duces the resisting power of the of
the
'
Dictator
clearly
'
the example
side, as
shows.
re-
This
is
a
most
important point in connection with the protection of the monitor
class
special notice
very greatly
upper deck
another
feature
deservins:
the necessity which exists of adding
is
to the
weight and thickness of the iron
in order to prevent penetration
a danger
fire,
and
;
to
which these
by depressed
vessels are peculiarly
hable on account of their small height out of water.
This
is
a point
much
neglected by amateur advocates
of turret-ships with extremely low free-board, but one
which
is
really of vital importance,
and which has been
so recognised by Mr. Ericsson and other American constructors
;
while in our
own Navy we have an example
of the higli estimation in which the Admiralty hold this
matter in the monitors which they are
ing, and which have iron upper decks
The area
inches thick. for example,
is
2,
now 2.4,
build-
and
3
of this deck in the 'Glatton,'
11,348 square feet; the total weight of
3-inch plating for such an area of deck
is
about G08 tons,
a weight sufficient to increase the free-board of such a E 2
A7nuour of the
52
ship by 7 feet, even
were
side
cannot
if
Chap.
Iroii-Clads.
the wliole additional heiglit of
These
plated, say, with 9-inch armour.
home
to bring
fail
1 1.
facts
mind the
to the reader's
importance attaching to the proper protection of the decks of ships of the monitor type, and to show that the total weight of
not
is
much
so
armour required
in these vessels
than that in broadside ships of
less
the same principal dimensions, but having a greater
many
height of free-board and thinner upper deck, as
The
persons sup230se.
a low free-
that with
fact is
board you are at liberty to apply to the protection of the deck the armour which, if applied on the broadside,
would leave further
.
tlie
deck
still
exposed, thus either rendering
armour necessary or exposing the ship
pressed and vertical
economy of armour
in ships of
low free-board
Before concluding this chapter,
to de-
the real
It is in this that
fire.
lies.
I desire to
make
a
few remarks respecting the arrangement of the armour
on
the
so-called
" breastwork
designed
monitors,"
within the last two or three years at the Admiralty.
These ships resemble American monitors in having their
upper decks at a comparatively small height
above water
;
but instead of having those decks flush,
except where the turrets, the funnels, air-shafts, and casings to hatchways rise above the deck-height, they
have a space
amidships,
enclosed
by an armoured
breastwork, which rises several feet above the deck, in
which space the cipal
turrets, funnels, air-shafts,
hatchways are
for
a
large
the turret
portion
By
situated.
actual height of free-board
of
is
the
ports above water
is
means the
this
increased
length
;
and prin-
considerably
the
height of
made much
greater
Chap.
than
Avrnoiir of the Iron-Clads.
II.
is
usual in the
serious
to
injury,
t^^i
American monitors;
the deck, funnels, &c.,
much reduced
is
advantages are gained, to which
I
;
and other
only witli
dea]
more
shall refer
particularly in the chapter on turret-ships.
present I desire to
liability
tljo
from the jDerforation of
resulting
the
For the
comparative
powers of carrying armour possessed by ships on the American and P]nglisli systems, and for purpose a brief statement will
Supposing two ships
built this
suffice.
having the same height of upper deck above water, and the same thickness and weight
whether
it
to be built
armour, the question arises
of side
would be better
the turrets, the funnels,
to protect the
and the
lower parts of
air-shafts, as well as all
by separate patches of armour, have an enclosing breastwork, which would pro-
the openings in the deck,
or to tect
all
those parts.
It
will
be obvious
tliat,
if
the
former plan were adopted, the deck would liave to bo completely plated over with strong iron, while the latter
plan would render
it
unnecessary for the large
space enclosed by the breastwork to be so strongly
This gives a considerable advantage to the
protected.
breastwork monitor, and one which would be at
all,
little, if
diminished by the difference in weight between
the armour on the breastwork and the armour recpiired for protecting separately the various parts
enumerated
For instance, in a ship with two turrets, the weight of armour on the lower parts of the turrets, all of which must Ije the funnel, and the air-shafts above.
—
plated for a considerable height above ihe low deck, in order
to
prevent penetration and the consequent
entry of water into the interior of the
si
n'p
—together
Armour of the Iron-Clads.
54 with that
Chap.
would not
protecting the hatchways,
ir.
fall
below the weight of armour on a breastwork surrounding the bases of
these parts.
all
The breastwork system compares
still
more favourably
with that employed in the 'Prince Albert/ 'Captain,'
and other
turret-ships, in
which a height of free-board
of 7 or 8 feet has been adopted, in order to raise the turret
guns a considerable height out of water.
In these
armoured throughout the length the height of the upper-deck beams but by
vessels the hulls are
up
to
;
adopting the breastwork and low free-board, the turret
guns can be carried
at as great a height
above water as
in ships with a greater height of upper deck above water,
or even higher, and the total surface to be armoured
diminished.
is
It is possible, therefore, either to carry a
greater thickness of armour on certain dimensions on a breastwork turret-ship than can be carried by a turret-
ship of the
'
CajDtain
'
type, or to carry as thick
armour
on a breastwork ship of smaller dimensions. In order to render the preceding descriptions clearer, I
still
have given in the accompanying engravings methods of disposing the
illustrations of the various
armour upon the
hulls of our iron-clads.
In each case
the darkened part represents the armoured portion of
the ship, and the lower dotted lines indicate the positions of the lower edge of armour. to
add that the
'
Cerberus
breastwork monitors
;
'
is
and that
It is
only necessary
taken as the type of it
has been considered
unnecessary to give a sketch of a completely protected
by omitting the upper-deck bow battery of the 'Lord Clyde the reader will have a representation of
ship, as
'
that arrangement.
•Chap.
II.
Armour of the
Iron-Clads.
HM/?/f/0/?
H£C TOR
/IC///LI£S
LORD CLYDE
HERCULES
/AH^//VCfBLE
CERBERUS
AfOA/ARCH
55
'
Chap. IIL
A^nnamcnt of the Iron-Clads.
^6
CHAPTER ARMAMENT OF THE
The powers
of offence
in the preceding
arrangement alluded,
IROX-CLADS.
of our
grown simultaneously with and
III.
ships
have
powers of defence,
their
remarks on the thicknesses and
of armour-plating
more than
iron-clad
I
have of necessity
once, to the progress
made
in naval
A
very few
remarks on the armament of these vessels
will, there-
ordnance within the
fore, suffice to
last
few years.
complete the reader's information on the
subject.
The
offensive
powers of a war ship are principally
measured by the number and power of her guns, and
by the training which those guns command; while in guns are those which must be chiefly considered. The wooden line-of-battle ships and frigates of which the strength of our navy con-
iron-clad ships protected
previously to the
Warrior were armed with 68-pounders weighing 95 cwt., 8-inch guns weighing 65 cwt., and 32-pounders of which the sisted
heaviest weighed
58
building of the
cwt. and others
'
only 42 cwt.
The 68-pounders were
usually mounted as pivot-guns, and the 65-cwt. guns were the heaviest mounted on
the broadside, while the bulk of the
armament was
formed of 32-pounders.
These guns, being distributed along the broadside and arranged as bow and stern chasers,
commanded
the whole sweep of the horizon
;
Chap.
Armament
III.
of the Iron-Clads.
^^
and, as previously remarked, in some cases great sacrifices
were made
to accomplish this result.
A
great ad-
vance was made ujoon the weight of the broadside guns
by the
carried
'
Warrior/ her armament consisting,
at first, entirely of 68-pounders.
was
to
The
original intention
have thirty-six of these guns, two being mounted
and twenty
as pivot-guns on the upper deck,
of
tlie
remainder being placed in the protected battery on the
main deck.
These twenty guns constituted the real
strength of the ship, considered as an iron-clad, as the sixteen carried outside the battery to injury
were even more liable
than they would have been in a wooden ship
;
but the arcs of training of the protected guns were
extremely limited (only extending about 25 or 30 degrees before and abaft a transverse line), and there was, con-
want of command over by far the greater part of the circle of training, and of direct sequently, an entire
ahead or astern
Similar remarks apply to the
fire.
protected guns of the '
'
Black Prince,'
In the vessels of the
Resistance.'
provision was, however,
made
'
'
Defence,' and
Minotaur
bow and
for
'
class,
stern fire;
a transverse armoured bulkhead was built across the ship at about 25 feet from the bow, and the chase guns
were fought behind the bulkhead upon the upper deck. I need not trace the various steps by which the advance has been
made
in
the power, weight, and
training of our naval guns, or describe the
many and
ingenious contrivances that have been introduced
Captain
Scott
and
others
working of heavy guns. of the G8-pounders of the
ment which
failed
to
into
Suffice '
the it
])y
mounting and
to say that, instead
Warrior's' original arma-
penetrate the 'Warrior' target
1
A rmament of the Iron-Clads.
58
Chap.
1 1
200 yards' range, we now have 64-ton guns that side at 500 yards, Warrior's would pierce the
at
*
'
12-ton guns that would do the same at 2000 yards, and 25-ton guns that would probably penetrate any iron-clad afloat, before the construction of the ^Hercules,'
at a
range of 4000 yards, while 30-ton guns
will be carried
by the
The armaments course, been
*
Thunderer' and 'Devastation.'
the
of
changed
earlier
as heavier
guns have been
duced, and as a representative case of the to.
'
we may
ol
intro-
take that
which has been previously alluded
Minotaur,'
This vessel was designed to carry
Armstrong guns,
tively light
have,
iron-clads
forty of
fifty
compara-
which were
to be
placed in the main-deck battery, two to be used as protected bow-chasers,
and eight
As now
upper deck.
to
be unprotected on the
arranged, her armament consists
of four 12-ton and eighteen 6i-ton guns in the battery,
and of four 6i-ton guns on the upper deck, two of which are protected by an armoured bulkhead. The number of guns (exclusive of boat and field guns, &c.)
now
first
intended
carried ;
is,
therefore, only one-half of that at
but as their power
wisdom of the change comment.*
the
is
* In referring to this subject at the
1863, Captain Scott
made the
is
so
much
increased,
any
too apparent to need
Royal United Service Institution in
following interesting remarks:
— "The
size of
" the gun is of vast importance, more than is generally assigned to it, and for " this reason 20 guns, each a 1-pounder, are fired at a target of iron I3 in. " thick, and produce no effect one gun, a 20-pounder, is fired and smashes it,
—
;
in both cases the same amount " of metal is used ; and on this principle an official record of experiments at " Portsmouth states that one 68-pounder produced more destruction than five
"the velocity
" 32-pounders. "effective *'
in both cases being equal;
Arguing from
tiiis,
it
appears that one 150-pounder
than ten 68-pounders, one 330-pounder
pounders, and a broadside of three 330-pounders
is is
is
more
equal to seven 150-
more destructive than
Chap.
Armament of the
III.
While, in ships already
made
been
built, the
59
substitution
has
moderate number of heavy guns
of a
capable of piercing the considerable
Iron-Clads.
most
sides of
number of
lighter
iron-clads, for a
guns which would be
virtually
powerless
against
armoured
vessels,
has naturally formed part of the
it
design of later ships to
heavier guns.
the
number of
greater
make provision
for fewer but
For example, the ^Bellerophon
'
much
carries
ten 12-ton guns in her central battery, and three G^-ton
guns on other parts of the main deck (two of the latter being in an armoured bow battery), besides two more 6 J-ton guns on the upper deck
;
and the 'Hercules' has eight
18-ton guns in the central battery, two 12-ton guns in protected batteries at the
bow and stern, and four
guns on the upper deck, the These
18-ton
weight, are
were
so
cessful
being unprotected.
latter
guns, throwing projectiles of 400
the
broadside, but
the
arrangements
working them
for
complete as to leave no doubt of their suc-
management
—an
anticipation
made
which has been
at sea.
ments of the turrets of the 'Monarch,' Glatton,' are to consist of 25-ton
shot,
lbs.
most powerful yet mounted on the
fully realised in the trials since
'
G^-ton
and the monitors
'
*
The arma-
Captain,'
guns throwing
Thunderer
'
and
'
have
and
600-lb.
Devastation,'
have Judged simply by the projectiles, the progress made in naval ordnance must seem enormous designed this year (1800), are, as
I
said, to
30-ton guns.
"10^
Warriors." In this last statement the 'Warrior's' broadside is taken twenty 68-pounders. Captain Scott also gives a table based on this principle, which will be found in the Journal of the Institution for 1863. Without considering these deductions to be exact, we may take them as the at
result of the attempts made by an experienced officer to infer from actual experiment what the comparative value of different guns would prulx\My 1^.
6o
when
Armament of the 68 -lb.
tlie
'Warrior's'
guns
0/?/C//V^lL
cast-iron
Iron-Clads. spherical
^/?MAA'r£-,VT
or
//?OA/-CL/IDS
'*^'
B£ll£fifOPf^/OA/'s /IPM/IA7£-/i/r
CHARCC
~ I
~
of the
(68 P? .9S CWT CU/v) charge: /Bia/
(bSOPB /2T0NCUJV)
_^
/1/9M/IA7£/Vr
MO/VARCH's
shot
compared with the elongated,
is
/-/STRCL/LITS^
Chap, hi,
(400 pa
/6TOA/ cu/v) charge: go LOS ^
AR MA/17EA/-
X
rNOA/DER£p's /)RMAM£A/T
^^
4 J LBS
(eOOP/? 25 TOA/ CUJv)
CHARC£ 70 LBS
/^600 P.f 30T0AfC(/A/)
C//APC£ /OO LBi
— Aj^manicnt of the Iron-Clads.
CiiAr. III.
or chilled-iron projectiles
steel
the
'
Bellerophon's
the
'
Hercules
600
lbs.
rifled
'
400
and
lbs.,
and when we add
;
used, wliicli lbs.,
for
for those of
for the turret-ships'
guns
to this the substitution of
ordnance for smooth-bore, the advancement made
in the last effects
'
now
guns weigh 250
6i
more striking. The enormous shot, propelled by
few years seems
produced by these
still
heavy charges of powder, we should naturally expect, would be out of all comparison with those produced by tlie
old ordnance
;
and in order
to present the reader
with the means of partially comparing the powers of our present guns and those of the guns carried by our
wooden
fleet
and our
earliest
panying engravings and
Description of Gun,
iron-clads, the
table are given *
:
accom-
Armament of the Iron-Clads.
62 nation of
employed,
headed "
dynamical expression
tlie
Energy
represent what
'
may
energy
total
power stored figures,
is
it is
be termed the
at
is
all
their
'''
punching
powers
to force their projectiles its
backing
while the
;
" tabulated represents the real
in each shot,
"
amount of
and which can be expended on
necessary to remark that I have only given
for the
as that
columns
Before passing to the consideration of these
a target.
them
i,e.^
here
per inch of Shot's Circumference,"
power through an armour-plate and of the guns,
*'
^'energy"
will be sufficient to state that the
it '
Chap. in.
68-pounder among the smooth-bore guns,
power the punching
the only case in which the penetrating
worth
Taking
notice.
power of the shot when
it
first
leaves the muzzle,
it
ap-
the 25-ton gun is about 3^ times, the more than 3 times, the 9-ton gun nearly gun 18-ton twice, and the 6^-ton gun more than 1^ time as power-
pears that
ful as the 68-pounder.
at the
These are noteworthy
facts
;
but
1000 yards' range the proportionate powers
For example,
of the rifled guns are greatly increased.
gun
from 3^ times to more than 7^ times, and the 18-ton gun from 3 times to nearly and similar 7 times the power of the 68-pounder
the
25-ton
rises
;
remarks
apply to the
energy of the largest
other rifled guns. rifled
The
total
guns, of course, increases
even more rapidly than the punching or penetrating
power per inch of circumference; and at the 1000 yards' range we see from the last column that the 25-ton gun
is
about 8i times,
more than 11 times, the 18-ton gun and the 12-ton gun more than 5 times
as powerful as the 68-pounder 8-inch gun.
tenance, at long ranges, of the penetrating
The mainpower of
Chap.
Ai'iuanient of the h'on-Clads.
III.
heavy
from
projectiles
rifled
ordnance
6'^
is
highest interest and importance.
of the
however, dwell upon
it
a
matter
I
cannot,
now, but leave the reader
to
The more
study at his leisure the jjreceding table.
he grasps the facts there stated the higher will
fully
become
made
appreciation
his
in
of
the
immense
advances
power of the armaments of our
the
iron-
clads.
Our neighbours, the French, have made
considerable
progress in the same direction, having to a great extent
exchanged the 55-230under smooth-bore guns that first
formed the bulk of their armaments
and 7|-ton
rifled
for 5-ton
guns, while some of the larger and
later vessels carry 13|-ton is
at
and 21|-ton
rifled guns.
It
of course difficult to compare these guns with those
carried
by our own
ships, but according to
information at present
gun
to our 12-ton gun,
our 6^-ton gun. are
The
and the 7^-ton French
calibres of the three
all
Moderne
for
informed,
French guns
9^, and 7^ inches respectively, and A writer in the Revue breech-loaders.
December, 1868, who these
criticises
guns
is
evidently well
most
unfavourably,
stating that the breech arrangements are satisfactory,
rate than once in
guns can be interval. is
by no means
and that under the most favourable circum-
stances the heaviest
this
to
about lOf,
they are
gun
French
about equal to our 18-ton gun, the 13|-ton
is
French
made
the best
public, the 21|-ton
guns could not be
fired at a greater
two minutes, while the English heavy
fired
According
three or
four
times during
to this authority
that
our 9-inch 12-ton
more powerful than the heaviest French gun, and
he attributes
to l)ad
powder and
to tlie
improper
Armament of the
64
construction of
tlieir
guns, by which the
much exceed
obtained do not
Chap. hi.
Iro7i-Clads.
initial velocities
three-fourths those ob-
His conclusion, with respect
to
the relative merits of the guns of the two navies
is
tained with our guns.
o'iven in the sentence
" whatever
it
^'
where the
''
decisive part,
" powerless
" force."
may
:
—
cost
" It
must then be confessed,
us,
that in an
engagement
would be called upon to play a squadron would be almost French a
artillery
against
an Eughsh squadron of similar
Without professing
to regard this verdict as
conclusive, I think there can be little doubt that our artillery
is,
much
at present,
superior to the French,
and that the system of muzzle-loading
for
heavy guns
has hitherto proved far better than that of breechloading.*
The Americans,
as
different system in the
is
well known, have followed a
development of their naval guns,
preferring to have a heavy projectile of large size with
a comparatively low velocity, instead of an elongated projectile of less
weight moving at a high
velocity.
The American system has been well termed the racking" or "battering" system, in opposition to our own method, which is known as the " punching " system. In ^'
carrying out their plan, the Americans have adopted
guns of
9,
guns of
25-incli
11, 13, 15,
and even 20-inch
calibre
calibre,
and upwards are said
to
and be
* The Ordnance Select Committee reported in 1863 that " the preponderance "of opinion seems to be against any breech-loading system for the larger "guns." In chapter vi. of Mr. HoUey's work on 'Ordnance and Armour' (London Triibner and Co., 1865) will be found full descriptions of the merits and demerits of the various systems of breech-loaders proposed, and :
made with
A
study of these
facts will,
convince the reader of the wisdom of the policy of having heavy guns muzzle-loaders, at any rate, up to the present time.
made our
accounts of the I think,
trials
various guns.
Chap.
Armament of the Iron-Clads.
III.
65
These large gnns are almost without
contemplated.
are smooth-bores
exception of cast iron, and nearly
all
throwing cast-iron spherical
The 15-inch gun has
shot.
been adojDted for the turret-armaments of most of the but a few ships have
monitors,
20-inch guns.
15-inch guns throw a shot of about 450
charge of 60
200
to
of opinion
lbs.
prevail
merits of our
made
with respect
the
Shoeburyness will
On
to
guns.
comparative
This
we should
drawn from the serve to give a more
facts
In his admirable Eeport
definite view^ of the subject.
"
with a charge of
Great differences
own and American
at
lbs.,
of their powder.
naturally anticipate, but a few trials
with a
of their cannon powder ;* the 20-inch
lbs.
guns throw a shot of about 1080 from 120
lbs.,
The
the Penetration of Armour-Plates
by
Steel Shot,"
Captain Noble shows that the American 15-inch gun,
charged with 50
lbs.
spherical steel shot
penetrate the
'
of our powder, and throwing a
weighing 484
Lord Warden's
'
He the
would
fail
to
any range while charge, would send
side at
our 9-inch 12-ton gun, with a 43-lb. its
lbs.,
;
250-lb. shot through her at a range of 1000 yards. also states that the 15-inch *
Warrior
'
gun would not penetrate
beyond a distance of 500 yards, while
our 7-inch 6^-ton guns (weighing about one-third as
much
as the 15-inch gun)
would do the same with a
powder and a 115-lb. shot and the 12-ton gun would penetrate up to 2000 yards. It must be remembered that, instead of Xha steel shot hero charge of 22
lbs.
of
;
supposed to be used with the are really employed
*
This
is
15-incli
gun, cast-iron shot
by the Americans; and
about equal to 50
this tends
lbs. of En^li.sli pow.l-r.
;
Armament of the
66
our guns as respects pene-
to increased superiority in
There can be
trating power.
Chap. hi.
Iron-Clads.
little
or no doubt that the
American guns have greater battering power question at issue
as before stated, the relative merits
is,
We
of penetration, and racking or battering.
with the French, that the former
Americans have preferred the
summoned
scarcely be
the real
;
is
think,
to be preferred
;
the
Experience can
latter.
to settle this difference of opinion
in favour of the latter plan, for
even
if
the Americans
could show that their system was most successful in the
engagements of the
Civil
War (which
prepared to admit they can do),
it
I
am by no means
would
still
remain a
no comparison could be drawn between the
fact that
improvised, hastily constructed, and ill-armoured ships
which the Confederates produced and the
would not have been surprising
It
to find the
armour and backing torn away bodily from the
many
and
armoured and fastened ships of European
carefully navies.
well-built
sides of
Confederate ships by the impact of heavy shot
the wonder these very
is
rather that, instead of this taking place,
weak
fire v/ithout
ships in
some cases withstood a heavy
receiving any serious injury to their hulls.
The advocates of the American system have laid more stress, perhaps, upon the result of the fight between the monitor
'
Weehawken
'
and the Confederate
case-
mated ship Atalanta than upon any other event of the '
war
;
and
I
'
may, therefore, be pardoned a few additional
remarks respecting
it.
On
this occasion the
'
Atalanta's
'
was smashed in by a 15-inch shot from the Weehawken's' gun at a range of about 300 yards, and mainly in consequence of this the sliip was surrendered, as she was aground and could not steam away. The side
'
;
Chap.
A rmame7it of the Iron- Clads.
III.
67
protection on the side of this improvised iron-clad has
been described as 4i-inch armour, inchned at an angle of 35 degrees to the horizon, and backed by more than 2 feet
wood
of
American
;
ofBcers,
the
facts,
seem
to
according to
reports of
be that the armour consisted
of two layers of iron bars, about 6 inches wide, and that the fastenings of these bars, as well as the other details
of the construction, were exceptionally
weak and im-
perfect in consequence of the urgency with which the
preparation of the ship had been pushed forward, and
of the want of suitable materials in the Confederate
In short,
dockyards. that the
battering
it is
scarcely possible to conceive
system could have been applied
against a target better fitted to be shaken to pieces
and, from the results obtained under these circumstances, it
is
absurd to attempt to deduce any correct ideas
specting the effect which this
re-
gun would produce against
European iron-clads. The results given in Captain Noble's Eeport are so conclusive as to the powers of
gun
the 15-inch fate of the
'
we
that
Atalanta
'
are not likely to hear of the
being again used as an indication
any French or English iron-clad that might be attacked by an American monitor. of what would befall
It
is
not without interest to note that the latest
expression of American opinion on this question decidedly
inclines
to
the
abandonment of
their
own
battering system, and the adoption of rifled guns with
a high speed of projectile.
In their Report, issued on
15th February, 18G9, the Ordnance Committee appointed
—
" To return to smooth-bores by the Congress say " throwing huge spherical masses of iron at low velo" cities is to disregard all modern progress in the :
F 2
;
Armament of the Iron-Clads.
68
" science of gunnery,
and
Chap.
arm
to return to the
" two hundred years ago."
ill.
in use
Such an admission as
this,
coming from such a body, cannot but be regarded
as a
proof that, after some years of experience with their
own
system, the Americans have become convinced of
the superiority of the European system. This conclusion in
no way
detracts,
however, from the credit due to the
American people for the extraordinary skill and enterprise which they brought to bear upon the construction of both guns and ships when called upon to suppress the gigantic rebeUion of the Southern States by land
and
sea.
In concluding these remarks on the armaments of iron-clad ships, I
would again
refer to the great im-
portance of giving large arcs of training to protected
The Warrior
guns. the in
*
'
Minotaur
'
is
'
is
very deficient in
this respect
powerful, but this power
is
with complete protection.
connection
ships with central batteries and
armour
obtained
Our
belts
later
have been
gradually improved, by cutting ports in the armoured
bulkheads at the ends of the batteries, and recessing the sides of
some
vessels so as to be able to fight
guns
at a
small angle (usually about 15 degrees) with the line of
the keel short
;
while in other ships, as in the
protected
extremities
batteries
'
Bellerophon,'
have been formed
in order to get fore-and-aft fire.
most powerful broadside
at
the
In our
ship, the ^Hercules,' these
two
plans are combined, the foremost and aftermost 18-ton
guns on each
side of the central battery being capable
of firing through recessed ports in the bulkhead, as well as at broadside ports,
and a 12-ton gun being carried in
each of the batteries at the
bow and
stern to obtain
Chap.
Armament of the Iro7i-Clads,
III.
fore-and-aft
By
fire.
tliese
69
arrangements every point
on the horizon can Le commanded by powerful guns
The most complete arrange-
sheltered behind armour.
ment yet made cible
'
class,
guns placed
is,
however, to be found in the
which commands an all-round in
Invin-
'
from
fire
a central protected battery.
Tliis is
accomplished by means of the four upper-deck battery guns, which can be fought either in a fore-and-aft line
main strength of the broadside consisting, however, of the six guns in the main-deck battery, which have the ordinary broadside training. or on the broadside, the
As
previously stated, the French have
made
similar
arrangements, in order to increase the horizontal range of their
protected
guns
;
and the Americans have
recognised the importance of this feature of construction
by having the deck arrangements of
their monitors
of such a character as to permit the turret guns to be fired
in
all,
or
nearly
all,
The English
directions.
turret-ships constructed before the introduction of the
breastwork system for monitors accomplish the same object in another way, but with tions, as I shall
many
serious limita-
explain in another chapter
;
all
the
breastwork monitors, however, have a complete com-
mand
of
all
points of the horizon with
their
turret
— /o
Structure of the Iron-Clads.
CHAPTER
Chap. IV.
IV.
STRUCTURE OF THE IRON-CLADS.
A
PERUSAL of the
jDreceding chapters
will,
I
think,
have convinced the reader that great progress has been
made
since the construction of the
the armour and the in this chapter to
Warrior
'
in both
armament of iron-clads I propose show that equally great and im;
portant progress has been those ships.
*
made
in the structure of
I shall not deal with the subject
from a
my object will be rather to show, in as popular language as possible, that the great
technical point of view
essentials of strength,
and durabihty, have the changes
changes
;
combined with
all
been carefully kept in view in
made from time
really
constitute
to time,
arrangements
and that those
improvements
words, that our recent ships are structural
lightness, safety,
to
much
those
—
other
in
superior in their
which
preceded
them. It is well
known
was accompanied in
that the adoption of armour-plating this
country by the introduction of
iron for the construction of the hulls of ships of war,
and our iron-clad There
are, as I
fleet is for
number of wood-built of those '
vessels
Caledonia
'
the most part iron-built.
have previously
class,
stated, a considerable
iron-clads in our
are converted
ships
Navy, but most
— such
as
the
the 'Royal Sovereign,' the 'Favorite,'
'Research,' and 'Enterprise'; while the remainder
Chap. IV.
Structtire
71 '
Lord Warden/ Lord Clyde,' and Pallas were built of wood mainly for the purpose of utilising
such as the
—
of the Iron-Clads.
'
'
^
the large stores of timber that had been accumulated in the dockyards for use in
these
is
future the
added
and
iron-built,
numbers of our wood-built iron-clads unless
to,
are
any, reason to suppose that in the
if
little,
With
shipbuilding.
our iron-clads
exceptions,
there
wood
will be
should become necessary, in order to
it
meet the exigencies of a war,
to build
such ships of
material already at hand, or to convert our line-of-battle ships into
armoured
vessels.
The
feasibility
and pro-
priety of converting these ships will be discussed in a future chapter
;
for the present I
need only state that
plans have been prepared for the jDurpose of carrying
out such conversions should the necessity ever arise.
The
non-professional reader
to find that,
when wood
may perhaps
be surjDrised
ship building had, through long
years of practice, become so well understood and
should suddenly have given place to iron
j^er-
but
fected,
it
I shall
endeavour to show that there were good reasons
for the
change.
needs no argument to prove that in
It
the construction of clads,
;
all ships,
and
j)^i'ticularly
of iron-
one of the chief aims of the naval architect should
be the choice of such structural arrangements as will best combine strength with lightness.
The dimensions
and outside form of a ship determine her displacement,
and her capacity largely
between
to carry
weights of course depends
upon the weight of her tiie total
hidl, as the difference
displacement and the weight of hull
is
the exact measure of her carrying capacity..
in
wood
ships the
ships of equal size
liuli ;
weighs mucli more than
in fact, while in well-built
Now, ni iron
wood
ships
the weight of hull
is
Chap. iv.
of the Iron-Clads.
Strticture
72
quite one-half the displacement, in
properly constructed iron ships
it
is
less,
and yet the structural strength
This
fact,
now considerably is much greater.
with others, has led to the rapid development
of iron shipbuilding in the mercantile marine, where the
saving in weight of hull can be turned into remunera-
even
tive cargo carrying power.
In iron-clad ships
more important that
saving in weight of hull
should be
made
this
for all
;
weight thus saved can be ap-
and weight of
plied either to increasing the thickness
armour
it is
carried, or to decreasing the dimensions of the
ship required to carry a certain weight of armour. instance,
ment
an armoured ship having a
of 6000 tons will, if she
weighing about 3000
is
wood-built, have a hull
and the weights she can
tons,
on the system of our recent
The
the armour and adding to the armament-, ;
or, if
difference,
if
that
is
con-
the total weights carried remain
the same in the two ships,
it
of the ship being reduced
by
This illustration
of
can of course be applied to thickening
tons,
sidered desirable
if built
iron- cl ads, the hull will
only weigh about 2500 or 2600 tons.
400 or 500
displace-
total
carry will be of about equal amount, whereas, iron,
For
will allow of the fully that
will, I think,
I
tons.
convince the reader that
tinder this aspect the change
highly beneficial, and
tonnage
number of
from wood to iron
shall further
is
on give some
examples, taken from actual ships, wdiich will further confirm this view.
Nor
is
this all.
An
almost equally important feature
in the comparison of
wood and
has just been alluded
to,
viz. the greater strength
iron hulls for iron-clads
and now claims a
brief notice,
of iron-built ships.
Even
in
;
Chap. IV.
Strtichire
of the Iron-Clads.
73
wood sliip-of-war it is found tliat more or working takes place when tlie ship is severely strained by rolling and pitching at sea and this working necessarily tends to reduce the structural a well-built
less
;
strength, gradually
it is
true,
ordinary iron ships working and,
when
but no
In
less certainly.
practically impossible
is
the structural arrangements are properly
made, the only serious cause of
loss of
strength
is
to be
found in the slow deterioration, in thickness especially,
When we
of the various parts.
armoured
pass from unarmoured
more striking, since the causes of straining naturally become developed as the load becomes increased, and the armour, although to
it
ships, the contrast is still
forms so large a part of the total weight, has not as
yet been
made
fully
structural strength.
available
giving additional
in
It is true that
a very considerable
amount of longitudinal strength is given by tlie armour and that as far as our experience goes, the wood-built iron;
have not displayed any serious signs of weakness, the reasoD doubtless being that the weights of armour
clads
they carry are not very great. that, in order to strengthen a
the fact remains,
Still
wood
ship sufficiently to
carry even a moderate weight of armour, very large
dimensions have to be adopted for the component parts of the hull
;
and
if
the weights of armour were
great as they have
strengthenings
been of
required
in
late
wood
doubtedly become increased in
which w^ould make
it
still
more
in
iron
made
sliij^s,
as
the
would unweight to an extent ships
desirable to use iron
instead of wood.
The
durability of our costly iron-clads
most important feature, and
in
is
another
this respect also iron-
Chap. iv.
of the Iron-Clads.
Strticttcre
74
In an
built ships are undoubtedly superior to wood.
armoured
iron-built
a material which
is
is
made up
of
by the
subject only to deterioration
action of the sea-water inside, or
the hull proper
sliip
and the bilge-water
outside,
other causes producing more or less rapid If proper precautions
oxidation.
taken to keep
are
the plating well coated with paint, or some other protective material, the deterioration resulting
causes
very slow
is
indeed,
as
from these
by our
proved
is
experience during the last twenty-five or thirty years.
We may
conclude, therefore, that with proper care the
hulls of our iron-built
iron-clads
remain in an
will
excellent condition for a long period
and
;
it is
worth
notice also that the only part liable to decay not at
once accessible
—the wood backing and
outside the hull proper,
only,
As
untouched.
(and
it
now
that there
decay of
the
—
structure
the
of
ship
is
this
much reason to dread backing as many persons have not so
for the
under which
probable that siderable time
it ;
really
remaining
however
as our ..experience goes,
far
is
should become
reaches over ten or eleven years),
The wood used ditions
it
and renewed by removing the
necessary, be got at
armour
armour
to
can, if
it is
will
while
purpose
is
teak,
it
supposed.
and the con-
placed are such as to
remain its
appears
the rapid
efficient for a
make
it
very con-
freedom from acids prevents
any gradual wasting of the armour-plates and fastenings such as would most probably take place if a wood like oak were employed.* The wood decks, *
The
part of the backing most liable to decay
water-line of the ship, and doubts
is
obviously that near the
might reasonably have been entertained
respecting the durability of this part, even
if
the other portions continued
Chap. IV.
Strtuttire
of the Iron-dads.
75
upper works (when of wood), and internal
fittings of
these ships, are, of course, as liable to decay as those
of wood-built ships, but there
is
no
difficulty in
them, and their decay but slightly,
Now
strength of the structure.
and what a
ship,
replacing
if at all, affects
turn to a wood-built
different state of affairs
we meet ?
do
The
materials used in the hull are all liable to
less
rapid
decay, and unless, as
ensure, the timber used
may
ship is
is
very
more or
difficult
There
do more than allude to the fact that
to
within the period of service of
many wood
ships the
cost of repairs has far exceeded the original outlay
the construction best
wood
and that
to
thoroughly seasoned, the
is
soon be expected to require repairs.
no occasion
the
;
nor should
ships there
it
be forgotten that in the
must be some amount of working,
this tends to increased rapidity in
loss of strength,
on
decay and
while the parts most liable to decay
are just those which can be with the greatest difficulty
Instead of the continued efficiency which
replaced. wdtli a fair
amount of attention can be ensured
we
iron hull,
find, then,
falling-ofif in efficiency in
in an
an unavoidable and certain a
wood
hull
;
and instead of
the comparative ease with which the repairs in the
subordinate portions of the former which are liable to "
decay can be made,
we have
the difficult and expensive
repairs sure to be required in the essential parts of
wood sums
hull
;
tlie
while even w^ith those repairs, unless the
expended
upon them are very large indeed,
sound. It has, liowever, been ascertained by a thorough examination of the backing of some of the floating batteries built during the Crimean war tliat no decay had taken place at any part after eleven years from the date of launching.
;
Stntctiire of
76 tlie
tJie
Chap,
Lro7i-Clads.
i
v.
will not last nearly so long
wood-l)iiilt iron-clad
as the iron-built ship.
Taking next the question of pression
wood
safety, the
doubtless in favour of the
is
So much has been
ships.
popular im-
superiority of
said of the dangers
of iron ships foundering at sea, or being lost by driving
ashore and having the thin bottom plating penetrated, that there
was
at first a very strong feeling expressed
against the propriety of embarking our naval forces on ships
which were
liable to
such dangers.
It
has also
been urged that the great comparative thickness of a
wood ship's bottom renders her much less liable to loss by striking the ground, and that the fact of wood being of so much less specific gravity than iron gives her a great advantage.
represent the ship's
There
is
undoubtedly some truth
remarks, but nevertheless they do not fairly
in these
bottom
penetration
facts is
of the
case.
An
ordinary iron
without doubt very thin and liable to
by a rock or any other hard substance
but the danger resulting from penetration greatly reduced by the adoption of a proper
very
is
number
of
watertight divisions or bulkheads in the ship's hold,
while
may be now 'given
it
bottom,
almost got rid of by the cellular to all
our iron-clads, which prevents
when
the entrance of water into the hold even
outer
plating
is
penetrated.
Then with
respect
the losses of iron ships at sea by breaking side, it is
are
down
to
the
only necessary to say that such accidents can
only happen to badly built ships, and that clads
the
well-built
and
specially
all
strengthened.
iron-built iron-clads, also, the liability to loss
practically reduced to a
our iron-
minimum, but
by
In
fire is
this is not,
and
Chap. IV.
Striictttrc
of the Iron-CIads.
77
in fact cannot be, the case in wood-built ships
;
so that,
wood ships in freedom from danger of foundering, our recent iron ships are on the while not inferior to our
whole much in
Chapter
ship lend
of a
safer vessels.
is
shown
much more
readily than those
ship to the conversion of the side into an
eflScient target
ship
that, as
the structural arrangements of an iron
II.,
themselves
wood
must add
I
;
so that in defensive
power
also the iron
superior.
In hghtness combined with strength in armour-carrying
power
—
in durability,
may
our iron-built iron-clads
good reasons
were
we were enabled
yards to our armoured
safety,
There were, how-
for the production of the latter
vessels at the time they
struction
and in
therefore be assumed to
be superior to our wood-built ships. ever, very
—and therefore
to
built, for
by
their con-
add rapidly in our dock-
fleet ships
of equal merit with
by the French, while the resources of the private shipbuilders of the country were made those building
available for the construction of iron-built ships such as the 'Warrior'
and 'Minotaur.'
When
the urgent
needs of the earlier periods of the reconstruction of our
Navy had mined
to
thus been met, the Admiralty wisely deter-
develope our iron-clad
of iron-built vessels, structed having, as
the I said
fleet
mainly by means
only wood iron-clads conabove, been built for the
purpose of utilising some part of the large store of timber in the dockyards.
The French,
as
is
well
known, have clung to the construction of wood ships, only two or three large iron ships having yet been built.
This course has not, however, been unopposed,
many
advocates of iron for the hulls having urged the
Chap. I v.
Structure of the Iron-Clads.
78
adoption of a course similar to that followed in our
own Navy.
The explanation of the French
policy
is
doubtless to be found in the facts that they have not
the same facilities for iron shipbuilding that in this country, nor
and
in ironworks
anything like the same resources
factories
;
wdiile
they have an ample
and are well
sujDply of timber for shipbuilding purposes,
accustomed to
all
we have
the processes of
wood
construction.
Most French shipbuilders do not deny the advantages
by
possessed
iron,
and in their most recent
iron-clads
some recognition of these advantages has been made, the unprotected parts of the upper works (above the
armour
belt
and outside the central battery) being of
main portion of the hull is of wood. This is the system which was commenced in the Enterprise,' and it has the great advantage of making the unprotected upper works of an iron-clad with a wood hull practically incombustible an advantage which is iron, while the
'
—
of the greatest importance in naval warfare, since in-
cendiary
shells
weapons
are,
perhaps,
the
most
formidable
of destruction that can be employed against an
entirely wood-built ship with only partial protection.
There
is,
on which
many French and some English
laid great
weight,
however, one argument in favour of wood
stress,
viz.,
writers have and which undoubtedly has some
the superiority in point of anti-fouling
possessed by copper-sheathed
present
an
incontestable
necessarily j)ermanent,
wood
ships.
advantage,
but
This it
is
is
at
not
and various plans have been
proposed for covering iron ships' bottoms with paints, compositions, and metallic sheathing, and doing
with the fouling
now
so
common.
away
Our experience
Chap. IV.
Structure of the Iron-Clads.
79
goes to show that none of the paints or comj)ositions yet tried at sea secure immunity from fouling for any considerable time, this fact ships*
Two '
especially in
tropical
and
waters,
has brought the schemes for sheathing iron
bottoms with metal into greater prominence.
own Navy,
iron-clads for our
the
*
Swiftsure
'
and
Triumph,' are being constructed, in which the bottoms
will be sheathed with
wood, outside which will be
commonly used
fastened a copper sheathing like that
wood
I did not advise this
ships.
case of these iron-clads, but the late
had
sufficient confidence
in
experiment in the
Board of Admiralty
in the plan to authorise its
Other schemes have been proposed,
adoption in them.
of a simpler and less expensive character, for using zinc
sheathing on the bottoms of iron ships, concerning which valuable exj)erience
we
being gradually gained.
did not already possess these
tially
means of
Even
that some
at least jiar-
means would be discovered
would surely be bad policy
to sacrifice the
;
and
important
permanent advantages obtained by building iron solely
if
preventing fouling, however, there could not be
much doubt it
is
hulls
on account of the present disadvantage resulting
from the fouling of iron bottoms.
French navy,
it is
In the case of the
true that this argument for
wood
is
more weighty than with our Navy, because they have fewer dockyards and naval stations abroad where iron ships could be docked or If
we had
think
it
have their bottoms cleaned.
not the advantage in this respect, however, I
would
still
remain true that the numerotis and
important benefits resulting from the use of iron would far
more
tlian
with foulness.
balance
the
disadvantages connected
'
8o
Striictiire
Havino;
I
v.
chief considerations con-
noticed the
tluis
Chap.
of the Iron-CIads.
wood
nected with the relative merits of iron and
for the
structure of iron-clads^ I next pass
on
improvements that have been made
in the structure of
to observe the
our iron-built ships since the date of the construction.
These
unprovements
result of the adoption of
frame " system,
A '
first
what
is
Warrior's
mainly
are
known
'
the
as the " bracket-
introduced into the
'
Bellerophon.'
few particulars of the systems exemplified in the
Warrior and '
in order to
'
Bellerophon
make
'
must therefore be given,
the improvements intelligible to the
non-professional reader, and in giving them, I shall, as far as possible, use popular language.*
The
^
Warrior
'
and the
earlier
structed with deep frames, or
iron-clads are con-
girders,
running in a
longitudinal direction through the greater part of the
length of the ship, combined with numerous strongof plates and angle-irons, them at right angles. In fact, up to the height of the armour the ship's framing very closely resembles transverse frames, formed crossing
in its character that of the platform or
roadway of a
common
girder bridge, in which the principal, or longi-
tudinal,
strength
is
contributed
by the
girders that stretch from pier to pier,
continuous
and the transverse
framing consists of short girders
fitted
between and
fastened to the continuous girders.
If
we
conceive such
a platform to be curved transversely to a ship-shape form, and the under side to be covered with iron plating,
we have
a very fair idea of the construction of the
* Full descriptions and detailed drawings of the structural arrangements of our iron-built iron-clads, from the 'Warrior' up to the 'Invincible' class, will be found in chapters vi. and vii. of my work on 'Shipbuilding in Iron and Steel.'
— Chap. IV.
Stnictitre
lower part of the
we
ment,
of the Iron-Clads.
Warrior.'
*
If,
81
instead of this arrange-
conceive the continuous longitudinal girders
to be considerably deepened,
so-called " bracket- frames,"
by
to be replaced
and the transverse girders and then,
a ship-form, add iron-plating on
after curving this to
both the U23per and the under
sides,
we have
a corre-
spondingly good idea of the construction of the lower part of the struction
"^
Bellerophon.'
The
*
Bellerophon's
therefore, identical in character with the
is,
system carried out in the Menai
cellular
con-
'
and
otlicr
tubular bridges, which system has been proved by the
most elaborate and careful experiments to be that which best combines lightness
and strength in wrought-iron
structures of tubular cross-section.
tem, wanting, as
does,
it
The Warrior's '
an inner skin of iron
in a few places, such as under the engines is
and
'
sys-
—except boilers
not in accordance with the cellular system, and
inferior to
it
As
in strength.
regards safety,
is
no
also,
comparison can be made between the system of the War'
and that of the Bellerophon.' If the bottom plating penetrated, in most places, the water must enter the
rior is *
'
'
Warrior's
on the
'
hold, and she
for safety entirely
efficiency of her watertight bulkheads.
lerophon's' bottom
kind
must depend
is
is
broken through, no danger of
The water cannot
run.
inner bottom
bottom
is
also
is
outer bottom.
it is
two or three
would
depend on,
tlie tlie
this inner
feet distant
acci-
from the
Should some exceptional accident occur
by which the inner bottom rojtlion
enter the hold until
broken through, and
not likely to be damaged by an ordinary
dent, seeing that
'
If the ' Bel-
still
l)cin^-,
is
penetrated, the
'
]>elle-
have her watertight bulkheads
in fact,
under
to
lliese circumstances, in
82
Chap. ly.
Structure of the Iron-Clads.
a position similar to that occupied by
whenever
lier
bottom phi ting
an accident which would
might leave the
*
Warrior,'
*
broken through
j^rove fatal to the
;
while
Warrior
'
'
Bellerophon free from danger so long '
bottom remained
as the inner
is
tlie
This
intact.
no mere
is
fancy picture of possible danger in one case and safety in another
our experience amply confirms
;
Great Eastern,' which
For
it.
on the
example, the
'
lular system,
and has a double bottom, once ran upon
way
the rocks on her plating torn fatal to
skin
away
to
to
is
built
cel-
America, and had her outer
an extent which would have been
a ship without an inner skin, but as her inner
was not penetrated, the ship continued her voyage
in safety.
A
practical demonstration such as this of
the advantage in point of safety of the cellular system
can surely meet with no answer point of strength that the size,
^
is
;
also manifest
and the advantage in
when
it is
remembered
Great Eastern,' notwithstanding her immense
has shown few signs of weakness, even
when
bur-
dened with the very heavy weights of telegraph cables she has had on board. It
may
be proper in this connection to draw attention
employment of torpedoes war has not been lost sight of in
to the fact that the probable in
a future naval
carrying out these structural improvements.
Up
to
the present time torpedoes have been used almost solely for coast
and harbour defence, and have, under those
circumstances, proved most
destructive^ as
a
glance
through the reports of the operations of the Federal fleet at Charleston and other Confederate ports will show. It is
still
doubtful,
however, whether these formidable
engines of war can be applied with anything like the
Chap. IV.
same
Stmctiirc'of the Iron-Clads,
efficiency at sea,
which they Americans have,
tions
booms
under the vastly different condi-
will there it
is
The
have to encounter. proposed to
true,
unarmoured
to their
83
fit
torpedo-
ocean-cruisers, such as the
Wampanoag,' and a naval war would doubtless at once bring similar schemes into prominence. Nothing less *
than actual warfare can be expected to tion at rest
may
be,
it is
to provide as
torpedoes
;
;
set the
ques-
but whatever the result of such a test obviously a proper policy of construction
much
and
it
as possible against the dangers of
must be
freely
admitted that the
strongest iron-clad yet designed, although practically
by the heaviest guns yet constructed, would be very liable to damage from the explosion of a submerged torpedo. No ship's bottom can, in fact, be made strong enough to resist the shock of such an explosion and the question consequently arises. How best can the structure be made to give safety against a mode of attack which cannot fail to cause a more or less extensive fracture of the ship's bottom, even if it does no more serious damage ? In our recent ships, as I have imjDenetrable
;
said,
attempts have been
to this question.
made
to
give a practical answer
Seeing that the bottom must inevitably
be broken through by the explosion of a torpedo which exerts its full force upon the ship,
necessary to provide, as far as
it
obviously becomes
p(^ssible,
against
danger resulting from a great in-flow of water. is
the leading idea
which has been kept
in
view
arranging the structural details of our ships to meet danger, and the reader cannot
fail
double bottom and watertight
the
This in
this
to perceive that tlie
subdivisions
described
above are as available against injury from torpedoes as G 2
Chap. iv.
Structure of the Iron-Clads.
84
they arc against the injuries resulting from striking the
ground.
may, however, add here that in our recent
I
— particularly in the breastwork monitors Thunderer,' and 'Devastation' — great care
ships *
'
Glatton/ has been
taken to multiply watertight subdivisions in the hold to as great
an extent as
is
and that the depth of
possible,
made very
the double bottoms has been
considerable,
both of which changes have an important bearing on the subject
now under
The
discussion.
increased depth
of the double bottom increases the probability that the
inner skin
may remain
intact
broken through, particularly
even after the outer skin is if,
as
spaces between the two bottoms filled
with
had been previously
which would act as a protection to the The numerous w^atertight subdivisions
w^ater,
inner bottom.
now formed shij)'s
might be done, the
in this space also
add materially
to the
when
struck
chances of escape from foundering
The subdivisions in the hold proper, to still more to the ship's safety. formed by making watertight the partitions,
by torpedoes.
which
They
I
have alluded, add
are
or bulkheads,
which enclose the magazines, store-rooms,
lockers, passages, &c.,
which can be done expense, since
in the hold of the ship, all of
at a comparatively trifling additional
these
necessary to the
partitions are
proper stowage of the ship, and would exist even they were not made watertight. divisions has also
by
Another
if
series of sub-
been largely employed in our recent ships
fitting watertight iron plating
on the decks and
platforms which come below the water-line
;
and by
adopting watertight hatchways, or trunks, by which access
is
obtained to the parts liable to injury, without
any danger of the ship being flooded
if
those parts were
'
Chap. IV.
Stnicture of the Iroii-Clads.
611ed with water.*
prove
will
doubtful
trial, it is
sufficient
it
attack
may
by torpedoes
is
be the result of such a
clear that the ship's safety against accidents
more common occurrence
of
;
against
but whatever
;
must be rememwhether or not they
All these are,
bered, precautionary measures
85
thereby increased to a
is
very considerable extent, and that the system of internal subdivision must give a considerable degree of security
even against the torpedo attack. Hitherto I have been describing the structural arrange-
ments of the lower parts of the rophon
;'
'
Warrior and '
a very few remarks will suffice respecting the
upper parts in wake of armour.
It
has been explained
armour
in Chapter II. that the skin-plating behind
the
Bellerophon
'
in the
'
'
nearly
is
1
while there
the
'
'
target, but at the
considerable increase
if
to
the
same time they necessitate a hull,
beyond
the skin-plating were iden-
thickness with that of the
brief, then,
target, or
'
Bellerophon,' both as a ship
in the weight of
what would be required In
Bellerophon
no corresponding arrangement in
is
structural strength of the
and as a
'
These additions add greatly
Warrior.'
tical in
in
inch thicker than that
Warrior,' and that there are besides numerous
longitudinal stringers in the side,
Belle-
'
'
Warrior.'
the changes made in the
*
Bellerophon
and more recent ships involve the addition of an inner bottom,
and the adoption of thick skin-plating and
girders behind armour, besides a considerable increase in
the depth and strength of
which changes tend *
Full
|i:irticul;ir.s i)f
in clia[)leis vii.
and
xi,
tlie
longitudinal framing,
to give greater strength
and
these features of iron-cl.id cuiistiiicliou will
of
my
work ou
*tSbipbuildiiig in Iron
and
all
of
safety. l)c
Steel.'
ruuinl
86
But
as these additions effect this result,
might well be
it
anticipated that the total weight of hull
greater than '
if
Chap. I v.
of the Iron-Clads.
Strticttire
would
also
be
the weaker and less safe system of the
The increased efficiency however, been accompanied by a considerable
Warrior
has,
'
were carried
out.
in the total weight of hull
decrease
—a
decrease ob-
by saving unnecessary weight in other parts of the ship, and by effecting a distribution of the material more in accordance with the true principles of constructained
tion.
in
am
I
his
entitled to say this, because Dr. Fairbairn,
important work on
gone much further in
'
Iron Shipbuilding,' has
his approval of the
'
Bellerophon,'
or bracket-frame, system.*
In the
'
Warrior and the '
earlier iron-built iron-clads,
much
the hull proper weighed quite as
some cases more than
—
it
the
would have been. *
Warrior
cially in the *
At page 214
" the
first
*
'
much
'
*
if built
stronger than a
Bellerophon,' and
class,
wood
more
espe-
some improvement was
—
work Dr. Fairbairn says " The Bellerophon being upon what we consider sound principles, we deem it
of that
ship built
fact in
In the ships that came between
and the
Minotaur
—in
would have weighed
of wood, but was, of course, hull
as
:
*
'
" important to show in detail how the different parts are united so as to form " in combination a strong and effective ship. We may however observe, " en 'passant^ that great credit is due to the Naval Constructor for having " freed himself from all preconceived opinions, and for having adopted every " improvement and every recommendation calculated to increase the efficiency " and durability of this novel construction, and to promote the transfer now " in progress in the Navy from wood to iron." Further on (at page 220), in
speaking of the earlier iron-clads, he observes
:
— " As regards these
vessels,
they
" do not contain the elementary strength of the Bellerophon as exhibited "in the longitudinal keelson and cellular form of construction;" and in summing up his remarks on iron-clads (.sec page 23G), he adds :— " Iron or steel '
'
" of the best quality, carefully distributed in its strongest forms, and applied " with judgment in the construction of ships, on the cellular system with " double bottoms, is in our opinion the only material that will meet the " requirements of an effective navy."
— —— — .
Chap. IV.
Struchcre of the Iron-Clads.
87
made, the weight of hull falhng rather below the weights of armour, armament, and equipment carried. '
Bellerophon
direction,
'
still
In the
was made
further progress
in this
contemporaneously with the ado^^tion of the
special provisions for strength
above; and since the
and safety enumerated
Bellerophon's
'
'
construction, the
proportion borne by the weight of hull to
tlie
weights
carried has been still more diminished. These ments will perhaps be more clearly understood by
state-
refer-
ence to the following tabular statements of the weights of hull and the weights carried for some of the principal ships of our
Navy
:
Weight of HuU.
Wood-built iron-clads
:
Caledonia Pallas
Lord Clydo Earlier iron-built iron-cladd
Black Prince Defence
.
Acliilles
..
Total Weights Carried.
Tons.
Tons.
3382 1812 3G47
3367 1844 3979
49G9 3500 5030 5043
4281
:
IMiuotaur
.
2492 4495 5232
Weight of Hull, with thick .Skin-Plating and extra Girders included.
Eecent
iron-built iron-clads
Carried.
Tons.
Tons.
37!)8
Audacious
3652 3674 3961 2675
CJhitton (l)reastwork monitor) Thunderer (ditto)
3272"
:
Bellerophon IMoiiurch (turret- ship)
..
Sultan
*
Weiglits
This
\vei;;ht of hull
2209=*
4632 4856 3224 2651 5790
inchides also the ver}- strong delensive plating on (he
upper decks and breastwork decks of these shijis. figbting draugiit, carries, on the same weight of
The
'Glatton,'
when
at iter
324 tons more weight of coal and water, so that the wcigbts carried then reach a total of nearly
3000
tons.
hull,
Chap. iv.
Structure of the Iron-Clads.
88
A glance
tbrougli these tables will put the reader into
summary
possession of a brief stated.
In the wood ships
'
of the facts previously
Caledonia
'
and
*
Pallas/
the weights carried are as nearly as jDossible equal to the weight of hull
while in the
;
*
Lord Clyde,' one of
our most recent wood armour-clad ships, the judicious
wood
use of iron strengthenings to the
improved
weight of hull carried.
hull,
to
Then
about 300 tons
in the
first
less
and other
down
methods of construction, brought
the
than the weights
three of the iron-built iron-
named^ we find the weight of hull considerably
clads
exceeding the weights
making
and
carried,
those
ghips compare most unfavourably as regards carrying
power with the wood
ships,
superior in strength.
The
although doubtless
Minotaur
'
occupies a
'
much more
favourable position, for in her the weights carried
Next come
exceed the weight of hull by 190 tons.
the ships built on the bracket-frame system, with their
very strong framing and plating behind armour, their double bottoms, &c. '
The
first
ship of the type, the
by about 150 an excess which is rather
Bellerophon,' carries weights exceeding
tons the weight of the hull,
greater, in proportion to the dis23lacement, than that of tlie
'
Minotaur,' although the
more strongly and weight
safely built,
Bellerophon
might
which the
fairly
The importance
'
'
is
so
and has included
much in her
and the external
of hull the second iron skin
girders, both of wliicli
^
Minotaur
'
is
without, and
be placed in the weights carried.
of the last-mentioned feature will, per-
haps, be better appreciated
when
it
is
stated that the
weight due to the increased thickness of skin plating behind armour alone in the
'
Bellerophon' exceeds 120
'
Chap. IV.
Striuhcre of the Iroii-Clads,
The
tons.
'
89
^linotaur/ liowever, being one of the most
improved of the
earlier iron-clads,
ought
be compared
to
with one of the vessels which succeeded the
rophon/ in order
to
struction fairly.
Take
we
'
Belle-
contrast the two systems of conthe'
^
and
Sultan,' for example,
find the weights carried exceeding the
weight of
by nearly 900 tons, while in the Monarch the is more than 950 tons. The progress made since the Bellerophon was built is very well illustrated by the comparison between that ship and the Monarch,' for the later ship, with a hull of nearly the same weight as the Bellerophon's,' carries 834 tons more than the Bellerophon.' Another very striking instance of the progress made since iron Inills came into vogue for iron-clad ships is afforded by the comparison of the Defence with the Audacious.' The total weight of these ships and their lading is very nearly the same, hull
*
'
excess
'
'
'
'
'
*
'
'
the
*
Defence weighing 5992 tons, and the '
5899 tons when fully equipped.
'
In the
Audacious *
liowever, the hull exceeds the weights carried tons, while in the
'
Audacious
the hull
'
weights carried by 550 tons.
The
of the carrying power of the
'
730 tons, although she constructed on '
Defence
'
is
by 1000 than the
difference in favour
Audacious
'
amounts
specially strengthened
is
the bracket-frame
built after the
is less
Defence,'
'
system, while
to
and the
Warrior pattern. Perhaps '
the real magnitude of this saving will be better appreciated if I state that, if the
the system of the
*
'
Defence
'
had been built on
Audacious,' and the armoured surface
had remained the same, while in
all
the ship had been completed as she
other particulars
now
stands, the
saving in weight of hull would have jjcen suilicient
;
Chap.
Structure of the Iro^i-Clads,
90
iv.
have more than doubled the thickness of armour
to
As
throughout.
it is,
we find
the
'
Audacious
8-inch and G-inch armour instead of
of the
^
Defence,' having a total weight of armour and
backing exceeding that carried by the
210
carrying
'
4J-inch armour
tlie
tons,
'
Defence
by
'
and carrying besides 520 tons greater weight
of armament, machinery, coals, and equipment.
All
these advantages have been gained in this case, be
remembered, in a ship of comparatively small *
Audacious
the
'
'
2847 tons
being of
less
size,
it
the
tonnage than
Minotaur.'
The two
ships
*
Glatton
'
and
Thunderer,' which
^
stand last in the table, cannot fairly be compared with
any of the other ships, on account of the difference of type which has been explained in Chapter II. It will be noticed, however, that the weights of hull given,
although they include the very strong and heavy upper-
deck and breastwork-deck plating,
below the weights carried
;
fall
and that
very considerably
in the
'
Thunderer,'
one of our most recent ships, the projiortion of weights
any Some part of the improvement which I other ship. have here traced is due, no doubt, to the use of steel
carried to weight of hull
instead of iron
;
is
higher than
it
is
but thus far our experience with steel
has been of such a character as to prevent general employment. therefore, that
really the
and
It
may
very
improved structural arrangements are
main source of the saving
may
its
be taken for granted,
in
weight of hull
as a proof of the opinions of practical
matter, I
in
men on
this
refer to the fact that nearly all private
shipbuilders in this country
who
construct ^hips of
war
have followed the recent designs of the Admiralty, and
'
Chap. IV.
Strtcctiire
of the Iron-Clads.
91
have adopted the bracket system of construction
for
large iron-clads. I
have dwelt
at
some
subject, because to the
doubtful
on
lengtli
this feature of the
minds of many persons
it
appears
whether or not the improvement in thick-
ness of armour in our recent ships has been obtained
simply by decreasing the area of protected surface and
Undoubtedly
concentrating the batteries.
this fact has
aided somewhat in obtaining the increase in thickness,
much more.
but the structural improvements have done
when
remembered that in the preceding table and statements, I have dealt only with weights^ irrespective of thicknesses and quite apart That
this is so will
appear
it is
from the disposition of the armour, or the extent of
armoured surface in the ships compared. needs no argument to prove that
if,
placement, a certain amount of weight hull, it
It
surely
on a given is
dis-
saved on the
can be applied in increasing the weights carried,
either of armour,
armament, or equipment.
been done in our recent
ships,
and
I
This has
have shown the
saving in weight of hull to be so considerable as to allow the weights of armour, &c., carried by these ships to bear a far greater proportion to the total weight, or
displacement, than in system.
In
fact, so
cases that ships of '
ships built
on the
'
AVarrior
great has the saving been in
much
many
smaller dimensions than the
Warrior carry an absolutely greater weight of armour.
Such
'
results as these
may
be,
appreciated by the general
and no doubt
public
are, less
than some other
features of the iron-clad question, but they certainly yield to
no other
in
importance, for the savings in
2
9
Striccture
of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. iv.
outlay already effected by them, in conjunction with better
proportions, exceed
a
million
sterling.
It
is
necessary that these important facts should be borne in
mind, and the nation be made acquainted with the progress attained even in the abstruser features of iron-clad
ship construction.
Steammg of the
Chap. V.
Iron-Clads,
CHxVPTER
93
Y.
STEAMIXG OF THE IROX-CLADS.
The
consideration of the steaming qualities of the iron-
clad ships of the
Navy
forms a subject not much,
inferior in importance to the questions that
all,
far occupied
The
our attention.
if at
have so
introduction of steam
propulsion into war ships necessitated the reconstruction of
all
navies
;
and
in the later reconstruction, incident
to the adoption of armour-plating, the question of per-
formance under steam has very properly occupied a prominent place. When the iron-clad system came into vogue, the
wooden steam
long and highly successful
The
fleet
course
hulls of every class of shij)
had undergone a of
improvement.
had been increased
in
length and fineness of form as successive vessels had
been laid down, and their machinery had attained a state of relative perfection that had given to its manu-
an absolute and uncontested pre-eminence. In order that the actual steaming qualities of the ironfacturers
clads
may
be understood,
it
is
necessary to bear
in
mind what were and are the steaming qualities of our ships, and for this purpose the following
unarmoured
brief statement
is
given.
Tlie earlier steam-frigates, such as the 'Dauntless,'
designed in 1844; the 'Termagant,' of 1847; and '
tlie
Imperieuse,' of 1850, were all ships of less tlian 10
knots' full speed at load-draught.
The
'Trilanie,' of
Chap. v.
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
94
1850, went nearly lOi
and the
what
*
;
the 'Shannon/ of 1855,
Some-
Diadem,' of the same year, 12 knots. before
hiter,
the iron-clads came
in,
Hi;
a
load-
dranght speed of 13 knots was just attained in the Ariadne and the Orlando,' which are the fastest '
'
'
wooden steam frigates ever built for Her Majesty's Navy. Like progress was made in the steam line-ofThe battle ships, which were commenced in 1849. Agamemnon,' designed then, and of speed of the '
the *St.
Jean d'Acre/ designed
exceeded 11 knots.
bow lengthened went nearly
The 'Hero,'
5 feet
IH knots.
in
1850, but
little
had a Agamemnon's,' and
built in 1854,
from the
^
In 1856 followed the
lengthened 10 feet amidships from the
'
'
Renown,'
Hero,' which
went over llf knots; and she was succeeded in 1858 by the Defiance,' lengthened 10 feet at the bow from the Renown,' with what result is not known, as the last-named ship has never been completed and tried. '
'
Meanwhile, in 1854, the three-decker 'Victoria' was designed, and attained a speed of 12 J knots at load-
draught; and she was followed by the 'Howe,' made 15 feet longer at the bow, the latter ship attaining,
when
flying quite light (without masts, armament, or
speed of 13i knots.
stores), a
undoubtedly
much exceeded
This speed, however,
tlie
speed which would
have been secured with the ship rigged and loaded sea
;
and
that the fastest
I
may, fastest
wooden
for
therefore, state with perfect confidence
wooden
line-of-battle
frigates, after a
ships, like the
long course of improve-
ment, realised no more than 13 knots as a crowning speed at deep load-draught.
The wooden
corvettes
and sloops were similarly
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. V.
improved
form and speed as successive ships were
in
For example, the corvettes
down.
laid
95
'
than
9|-
knots; the
10^ knots;
'
'
little
Pylades,' of 1852, reached nearly
'Pearl,' of 1853, attained
tlie
and more
Conflict
'Highflyer,' designed before 1850, realised a
may
and the 'Jason,' of 1858, which
knots;
11
he taken as the
went
representative of our finest and fastest corvettes,
12 knots on her load-draught
As
trial.
to the sloops,
those designed before 1852 attained speeds of from 6^ to 8 knots
went
a
realised
the
;
little
OJ
'
over
Cordelia
'
and
Greyhound,' of 1855,
'
knots; and the
9
'
Rinaldo,' of 1858,
knots, the highest speed attained
vessel of her class.
The
limits of speed
the unarmoured corvettes and sloops therefore, as 12
and
9J
may
by any
reached in
— taken,
be
knots respectively these speeds
being attained only by the
latest ships of
each
class, in
which had been attempted every improvement that experience had shown to be desirable.
Keeping these
facts in
mind,
let
by the
sideration of the speeds attained
the
Navy on
the
'
'
Warrior,'
us pass to the con-
their load-draught trials. '
Black Prince,'
'
iron-clads of
We
Achilles,'
'
find that
Minotaur,'
Northumberland,' Bellerophon,' Hercules/ and Mon'
arch,'
have exceeded 14 knots
realised 14*2 knots, the
the
'
'
'
*
— the
Achilles
Minotaur' 14*4, and the
'
*
Bellerophon' having
and Warrior
'
'
'
14*3,
Hercules' 14' G9, and the
—
Monarch 14*937 knots the highest speed yet attained by any of our armoured ships at load-draught. The Lord Clyde and Lord AVarden have realised about '
'
'
'
13 i knots.
'
'
The remaining vessel of the Alinotaur '
'
class,
the' Agincourt,' has gone nearly 15^ knots \\hen flying light,
with no stores on board, and onlv her lower masts
Steaming of the Iron-Clads,
g6 in, so tliat
we
liavc every reason to anticipate that she
14 knots on the load-draught
also will exceed
Several of the ships of the
from
Chap. v.
'
Caledonia
line-of-hattle ships into
Penelope
'
The
'
'
made
lias
Eoyal Oak
and
'
a
'Pallas,' a ship of
over 12^ knots, and the
Hector
'
have gone a
'
Resistance,'
have
realised about
all
armoured knots;
Zealous,'
'
the
The
'
Scorpion
have gone about 10 knots knots
9J
;
summary,
this
'
has
of-battle ships
to
;
the
'
and the
'
it will
the
'
Yiper,' gunboat, has
Yixen
'
by more than a knot
secure
high speeds
in
vessels
Caledonia
'
;
and
Water-
9 knots.
wooden
of-battle ships.
;
faster
that
two other
than the
fastest
shijDS
speed than 13 knots, nearly
the smallest classes.
'
all
iron-clads
are either
line-
having a
belong to
make a comparison any wooden vessels, except in
It is difficult to
which may be fairly contrasted wooden corvettes, and of the Re-
Pallas,'
first-class
less
what may be
frigates, or turret-ships, or
between these ships and' the cases of the
of
with one or two exceptions,
Of the remaining
termed second-rate
line-
— an increase very
and that the converted
class are,
'
about equal in speed to the most improved type of
with the
10|^
be seen that several of
armoured ships are half a knot
unarmoured
the smaller
attained
the iron-clads exceed in speed the fastest
difficult
Defence,'
Prince Albert',
Among
have exceeded
witch,' also gunboats,
From
'
'
Wivern,' 'Enterprise,' and 'Research,'
'
gone nearly
and
11| knots.
the
vessels,
Favorite,'
'
little
and 'Royal Alfred'
are about one-fourth of a knot slower. '
while
;
moi'e than 12| knots.
little
Yaliant
'
*
have
frigates,
only 2e372 tons, has slightly exceeded that speed the
trial.
converted
class,
iron-clad
and the
realised about 13 knots;
'
'
Chap. V.
Steamijig of the Iron Chids.
search/ whicli
may
The
sloops.
'
compared with the largest wooden
])e
Pallas
has a speed a
'
while the
;
'
Eesearch
is
'
more tlian a somewhat faster than b}^
the swiftest sloop of previous date, the
regards the speeds at
full
over 13 knots,
little
and thus exceeds the 'Jason's' speed knot
97
'
As
Einaldo.'
power^ the iron-clads com-
pare most favourably, therefore,
witli the fastest
wooden
ships of the various classes.
As
great suspicions are
sometimes expressed with
respect to the results of measured-mile trials of speed,
may
be well to give some confirmation of the above-
stated facts. to '
it
the
trials
Warrior,'
we
It will suffice if
'
confine our attention
of some of our fastest iron-clads ^linotaur,'
and
early part of the year 1868, trials were ships, both
in the
open
made with
on the measured mile and by
The
sea.
circumstances, there
results
but
is
—the
In the
Bellerophon.'
*
these
six hours' runs
prove that, under similar
little
between ihe
difference
speeds obtained by continuous steaming at sea and those realised on the '
and the
Bellerophon
while at sea the
'
all
very nearly reached that speed
'
Minotaur
over 14 knots, and the
These
the measured mile,
Warrior' and 'Minotaur' exceeded 14 knots,
both the '
On
measured mile.
'
'
and
'
Bellerophon
Warrior was only a '
facts are interesting also
when we
trifle
'
;
went
slower.
consider that
the ships have been some time in commission, and
that their recent performances are very nearly identical
with those originally obtained on the measured mile. this connection I
may
fastest iron-clad, the
hours' trial
'
In
also refer to the fact that our
Monarch,' averaged on the six
a speed only about one-fourth of a knot
than that reached on the measured mile. II
less
Sleammg of the
98
But there
is
Chap. v.
Iro7i-Clads.
another feature of this question which
is
well worth attention, viz. the speed of the iron-clads
under
In
power.
half-boiler
this
respect,
also,
'
Achilles,'
Black Prince,'
'
and
Bellerophon,'
'
Her-
exceeded 12 knots; and the 'Warrior,' 'Mino-
cules,'
taur,'
'
the
The
result of an examination proves most satisfactory.
'
Lord Clyde,' and
Lord Warden,'
The converted
below that speed. 10 to 11 knots
'
—the
'
Pallas exceeded 11 knots, and the
none except the smallest speeds of
armoured
The
a knot.
Of
the remaining
to
10 knots, and
considerable
a
fastest
difference
of the two classes
is,
9
below 8^ knots.
fell
below the fulU
do not
fall
ships
by more than
between the full-power speeds
consequently, quite as great as
that between the full-power speeds of the
and the half-power speeds of the
wooden
frigates,
The
number of the
wooden
ships, therefore,
power speeds of the
little
ships realised from
several attained from
half-power
very
'
'Resistance' went nearly 10^ knots. iron-clads,
fell
iron-clads.
wooden ships The fastest
when running comparatively
light
(being rigged, but not stored), only attained 11^ knots at half-power
;
and
siderably reduced
and
stores
this speed
when
would, of course, be con-
the full weights of provisions
That
were on board.
ordinarily be considerable
is
this reduction
proved by the
would
fact that the
Mersey attained a full-power speed of nearly 13^ knots at full power when the stores were not on board, but '
'
only reached about 12| knots
when complete
The advantage possessed by the iron-clad
for sea.
fleet in half-
power speeds must obviously be of great importance in sea-going ships. The iron-clads could, by economising their fuel,
make longer passages under steam than could
Chap. V.
Stca77iiiig
be made in
tlie
of the
Ii^oii-Clads,
99
same time by the wooden ships;
or, if re-
quired, they could keep the sea, without requiring fresh supplies of coal, longer than the
wooden
ships,
supposing
that all the vessels had to traverse equal distances in
Add
equal times.
to this the fact that, in case of emer-
gency, the largest vessels of the armoured full
fleet could, at
power, distance the unarmoured ships, and reach any
where
place
tlieir
services
siderably shorter time
might be required
and
;
may
it
fairly
in a con-
be concluded
that in steaming qualities our iron-clads are superior to
the
wooden
It will
ships that immediately preceded them.
be observed that, in
preceding remarks, I
\\\^
have taken the measured-mile speeds as representing the real
of both our armoured and un-
capabilities
armoured
Many
ships.
am
persons, I
aware, regard
this as a fallacious test of a ship's powers,
speed
trials at sea
—
to
measured
take
previously given in Chapter
mile
-
I.
—
;
and
I
made under very
as the only
reasons for
trials
have been
need only state
that, while sea trials in diiferent ships are,
out exception,
and consider
My own
true standards of performance.
preferring
runs
not six hours'
almost with-
different conditions of
engines, boilers, and stoking, Avith different degrees of •foulness of
bottom, and very often under different
cumstances of wind and weather, measured-mile are
conducted by experienced
stokers in such a
way
staffs
order to secure
rison,
it
l)ecomes
measured-mile sea
trials
absolutely
trials;
and
as nearly, if not entirely, to
anything
previously
trials
of officers
eliminate the effects of these secondary causes. in
cir-
necessary
and a reference given
Hence,
like fairness of
{^cc
to
compa-
refer
to
to the resulls of
i»ages
12 ]i
and 2
ir»)
';
lOO
Chap. v.
Stea7ning of the Iron-Clads.
will, 1 think,
convince every one that no estimate of
a ship's actual steaming capability can be based upon I must add that the speeds put forward by our iron-clad ships are not intended to be taken as those which the ships would continue to
such
trials.
as attained
maintain at
sea,
say in a Trans- Atlantic voyage.
It is
perfectly understood, no doubt, that on the measured
mile the ships are tried in nearly smooth water, and generally with a low force of
wind
—
in short, under
At
the most favourable circumstances.
I
sea,
need
hardly say, the circumstances are not often so favourable,
and the speeds
consequently
are
realised
less
besides which, the fouling of the bottom, the varying
character of the coal and stoking, the different condition and management of the engines, and other causes, tend to produce, and sufficiently account for, very different
performances in the same ship at different times. of these causes are beyond our control
great efforts have been
made
speed incidental to fouling
and 'Triumph,' the
first
give iron-built iron-clad
coppered bottom.
;
to
;
but of
prevent the
and
in the
Most late,
loss of
Swiftsure
'
attempt has been made to ships the
Plans for
advantages of a
sheathing
the
bottom
plating of iron-clads with zinc have also been under consideration, I
and may possibly be
have already referred
carried out.
to the difficulty of
to speeds that are already high,
and
as but
adding
few persons
at present feel the full force of this remark,
it
may may
be
word or two on this point. It be taken as roughly correct to say that, to increase a speed of, say, nearly 12 knots to over 14 knots, it will be
well to add a
necessary to nearly douUe the power
—
in
some
cases
—
;
Steaming of the Irou-Clads,
Chap. V.
to quite double this
loi
The following examples
it.
illustrate
:
In Northumberland
3279 IL-R gave 11-729 knots. 14-132 0558 „ „ „ 3497 „ 11-842 „ „ 14-328 G949 „ „ „ 11-879 254G „ „ „ 14-358 5035 „ „ „ 12-103 3119 „ „ „ 59GG „ „ „ 14-227 12-123 4045 „ „ „ 14-091 8529 „ „ „
..
.... In Minotaur
„ In Achilles „ In Bellerophon
..
..
In Hercules
These figures show how dearly the speed are purchased in
and they
last
two knots of
these ships, long and short
all
also serve to indicate that,
when
people speak,
as they often do, of a " speed of 13 or 14 knots," or
of a " speed of 14 or 15 knots," they speak with
vagueness, for
tlie
may mean
difference of
a
difference
much
between 13 and 14 knots 2000 horse-power, and the
between 14 and 15 knots may mean even a
difference
much larger It mav be
difference of power.
of interest to add to this brief account of
own
the steaming of our
ships
some few remarks on the
speeds attained by foreign iron-clads.
Omitting
for
the moment the Rochambeau,' late the Dunderberg,' the fastest ship of the French navy is the Provence,' which '
'
*
is
said to have a little exceeded 14 knots,
vessels of her class are said to
ferino'
her sister ship, the first it *
*
is
designed,
'
La
from
said,
Taurcau
*
*
go 14 knots.
Magenta,' 13-7 knots. Gloire
13i
The
'
to
and her 13i
The
'
Sol-
vessels
consorts, reached,
knots,
and
the
has attained nearly the same speed.
Bellicpieuse
*
have attained 14 knots, and
also reported to
is
and the other
ram The
goes 12*5 knots, and the smaller iron-
clads or floating batteries have speeds ranging ironi 7 to about
7| knots.
On
a couiparison of these i-esults
'
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
I02
be seen that our
witli those previously given, it will fastest iron-clads
French
;
;
have higher speeds than those of the
that the converted ships of the
class are of class
Chap. v.
'
Caledonia
very nearly the same speed as the
*
Gloire
'
and that our smaller iron-clads have considerably
greater speeds than the
French navy.
It
corresponding ships in the
should also be
stated
that
these
alleged speeds of the French vessels are taken from
French
authorities,
and are much greater than could be
from their known horse-power and the
fairly inferred
No
forms of their water-lines. therefore, felt in the figures.
great confidence
is,
Perhaps the most
re-
markable performance yet reported, however, the
'
Hochambeau,' or
America
'
Dunderberg.'
was
for France, she
Before leaving
maximum
11*7 knots with 3778 indicated horse-power. arrival at
speed of Since her
Cherbourg some alterations have been made
and other
in her machinery, place.
that of
tried at the request of her
Mr. Webb, and obtained a
builder,
is
The Moniteur de '
account of the
mean speed
trials,
trials
la Flotte
and from
of 14*635 knots
having been made
;
of speed have taken '
has published an
this it appears that the
was obtained,
six
runs
no statement of the indicated power
The
appears to have been given.
formance of the ship on her
vastly improved per-
later trial
has naturally
caused some doubts to be cast upon the s|)eed alleged,
and even French writers have joined of such doubts.
For instance, in
in the expression
his
remarks on the
Admiral Paris points out * the great differences existing between the ship's capability as evidenced by subject,
her two
trials,
Sec page 205 of
'
and adds L'Art naval
ii
:
—
''
There
is
here reason for
rExjjosition universelle a Paris en 1867.'
;
Chap. V.
StcavnJig of the Iron-Clads.
" thinking, *'
and
a change."
There
remarkable
for desiring the details of so
In this opinion
I entirely concur.
information on the subject of
is little definite
the speeds attained by the fastest
103
American
The
iron-clads.
monitors are said to have realised 11 knots, but
the speed of most of the ships of this class does not
appear to have exceeded 7 knots, and in some cases the this.
The
'New
Iron-
speeds attained have been even less than greatest speed of the sides
'
also
broadside frigate
seems to have been 7 knots.
These
fio'ures
are for the most part taken from reports of
American
Navy Department, and may,
therefore,
officers to
the
be considered to prove conclusively that the speeds of all
except a few of their iron-clads
fall
considerably
below those of the smallest and slowest of our armoured ships,
and that
their fastest ships are
knots slower than our
more than three
fastest.
There are scarcely any recorded
facts
with respect to
the speeds of iron-clads belonging to other countries to
put before the reader
asserted that our
own
;
but
may,
it
I think, be fairly
ships compare favourably in this
respect with any vessels yet
built.
Intimately connected with the speeds attained by our iron-clad ships stands the question of their coal supply in fact, bility
no proper estimate of a
can be
ship's
made without taking
steaming capa-
into
account the
time during which she can proceed under steam before the coal she carries
is
exhausted, as well as the sjDeed at
which she can proceed.
A
few
facts in relation to this
subject will doubtless prove interesting to the reader, especially as this feature of our iron-clads ticularly of the ships built since
my
—and
appointment
to
par-
my
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
I04 present
office
—
lias
Chap. V.
again and again been pronounced
by writers and speakers professing to be The public intimately acquainted with the subject.
unsatisfactory
has been repeatedly informed that, in order to increase the weight of armour, armament, engines, and boilers in
armoured
down
ships, the coal
compared with that given
as
steamships
;
to our
and that a gradual progress
direction has been
made
unarmoured
at
once state that such
criticisms are both unfair and untrue
and, I doubt
;
not, the reader will agree in this opinion
when he has
read tlirough the following brief statements of
The ships
old type of marine engine, with
and the
capable
earlier
wrong
in this
since the construction of the
may
I
iron-clads.
earlier
supply has been greatly cat
iron-clads
of developing from
facts.
which our wood
were supplied, was
four
to
five
times the
nominal power, and the total weight of engines and boilers but little exceeded three-quarters of a ton per
nominal horse-power.
It
had been gradually improved
during a long course of years, and had been brought to such perfection that the
guaranteed power was often
exceeded on the measured-mile back, however, to
its
consumption of fuel
new type heaters,
;
many
trial.
The great draw-
excellencies
was
and, in consequence of
of engine, with surface
and other contrivances
for
its
large
this,
the
condensers, super-
economising
fuel,
was introduced. This type is capable of developing from six to seven times the nominal power, and the total weight of engines and boilers about equals one ton per nominal horse-power.
engines
is
The weight of the new
thus considerably greater per nominal horse-
power than the
old,
but the developed power
is
also
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. V.
show
greater, and, as I shall
\o
hereafter, they are far
more economical of fuel. Hence it happens that in comparing the coal supplies of two ships, one of which has the old-type engine and the other the new-type, it is
necessary to take account, not only of the weights of
and
coal carried, but also of the weights of engines
ship with the improved
as the
boilers,
but heavier
engines has, so to speak, a portion of the total weight
apparatus and fuel converted into a
propelling
of
permanent
economiser
of
fuel
—
portion of the weight which in one ship is
words,
other
in
given to
is
a
fuel
in the other put into superheaters, &c., in order to
economise
great a weight of coal. the
'
not necessary to carry so
fuel, so that it is
Warrior
and
'
'
Take, for example, the cases of
The
Hercules.'
'
Warrior,' with
engines of 1250 H.-P. nominal, has 920 tons as her
weight
of
her weight of tons
;
of coal,
than
coals,
while the
120G tons
for
'
making a
Hercules
and
boilers,
true that the '
'
carries
Warrior
'
fuel,
carries
Hercules,' but the
and, as I shall
*
show
about the same distance as her coal supply
is
as
GOO tons
a total of 1806 tons, or 86 tons ^
Warrior.'
exliausted.
more It is
200 tons more coal
Hercules'
'
engines have
been made considerably heavier on purpose mise
tons
has engines, &c., weighing
'
corresponding total for the
tlie
800
weight of 1720
total
1200 H.-P. nominal, and
making
than the
and
engines
to econo-
further on, she can steam
tlie
'
Warrior
This
is
'
can before
only a specimen
of the contrasts existing between the unarmourcd
sln'ps,
or the earlier iron-clads, and the comparatively recent iron-clads witli
improved engines.
Another point
to
which
I
must advert before going
Steaming of t/ie Iro7i-Clads.
io6 further
very mistaken
the
is
notion
Chap. v.
that
prevails
respecting the times during which our iron-clads can
proceed under steam alone before their coal
One
hausted.
often hears
stated
it
is
ex-
that those ships
can only steam for two or three days continuously,
being assumed in nearly
it
cases that the measured-
all
mile full-speeds would be maintained for the whole of tlie
time
;
To
assumed
tacitly
it is
our iron-clads
also that in this respect
below our unarmoured war
fall far
ships.
these statements and assumptions I entirely demur,
which
for reasons
the
first
measured-mile performances are the fairest
tests
possess of a ship's utmost actual steaming power,
the most favourable circumstances
and good best
we
under
—with trained stokers
and with the engines and
coal,
— they do not at
In
can be no doubt that, while
there
place,
once bring forward.
I will at
boilers at their
represent the conditions under
all
which a ship usually has
to
serve
at
When
sea.
engaged in chasing an enemy, or any other service requiring great despatch,
it
would, of course, be neces-
sary to drive a ship at as great a speed as possible,
although even then
it
cannot be expected that the
engine-power would be brought up to an equality with that developed on
sumption of
fuel,
the
measured
mile,
and the con-
consequently, would not equal that
corresponding to the measured-mile speed.
engaged on
general
such
service,
speeds would not be required
;
and
But when
extremely it is
high
in obtaining
such high speeds that the largest expenditure of engine-
power and I
fuel
have shown,
is,
also,
as
we have
our iron-clads are but
little
less
As many of
seen, involved.
the half-power speeds of
than the full-power
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. V.
our fastest wood
sjDeeds of
to
sliips,
i
so that
is
it
absurd
compare the times which iron-clads can proceed
full
wood
speed with those wliich
o7
at
ships can proceed,
omitting altogether the consideration of the difference
Adding
of speed in the two classes.
going considerations taking the
full
to this the fore-
respecting the
impropriety of
speeds and rates of coal consumption
from measured-mile
trials, in
order to measure a ship's
caiDability for
performing sea voyages under steam,
cannot
be seen that the popular opinion on the
fail to
subject
inaccurate.
is
In order
to obtain a just idea of the relative coal sup-
becomes necessary, then, to
plies of different ships, it
determine
how long
to proceed at good,
from 11
to
It
them
those supplies will enable
though not excessive, speeds, say
12 or Vl\ knots.
at
These would be very
high speeds for ships of war to maintain at fast
it
sea, as the
Trans- Allan tic steamers do not average 12 knots.
must be remembered
knots was the
also that 13
crowning measured-mile speed attained by our wood ships,
and that only a few ships reached that speed on
The Mersey,' one of our only made 12*587 knots; the
their load-draught trials.
longest '
wood
frigates,
another long fine
Galatea,'
12 knots on her
one of our 13
knots
'
last
load-draught
finest two-deckers,
on the measured
trial
tlie
;
although
mile
not reach
did
frigate,
slie
when
*
Duncan,'
exceeded
flying
liglit
(neither rigged nor stored), failed to reach 12 knots
on the only load-draught record of our
;
and the frigates
'Galatea'
*
we have any
of wliich
which belongs
Bristol,'
inferior
classes,
trial
only to
did not
the
'
to the class
Mersey
much exceed
11;^
'
and
knots.
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
io8
These four ships fair,
may
Chap. v.
be taken, therefore, not only as
but as more than average, specimens of our wooden
war-ships
—the
'•
iMersey
very exceptional cases
and
'
and
;
'
Galatea
'
being, in fact,
to give the reader a better
idea than words only can convey of the falseness of the
notion that our
wood
had
ships
coal supplies superior to
those of the iron-clads, I have in the following table
given the results of careful calculations, based upon recorded
trials,
of the times and distances during which
those ships, and some of our iron-clads, could steam either at
12^ or 11 knots per hour. premise that, in the calculations
It is necessary to
upon which the tion of fuel per
table
based, the rate of consump-
is
indicated
been estimated, both
for
horse-power per hour has the old
and the new type
of engine, from the results of our experience in nume-
rous ships of the Royal Navy. briefly
summed up
type, from 4 to
hour
is
3 lbs.
These
results
may
be
in the statement that, for the old
^\
lbs.
per indicated horse-power per
a fair value, and, for the
These figures
new
type, from 2^ to
will enable the reader to
judge of
the amount of the saving of fuel resulting from the
adoption of the improved engines.
I
may add
that,
while the table gives the probable results which would
be obtained with the ships named, as far as our knowledge of their performances extends, yet
it
is
not put
forward as more than a good approximation, as the various circumstances attending the steam-trials used are, as I
have previously shown, such as
attainment of entirely accurate results. the
*
Duncan
'
and
might be driven
at
'
Bristol,' I
to preclude the
In the cases of
have assumed that they
Yl\ knots by their present engines;
—
.
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. V.
but
it is
only fair to state that
be developed in order to attain
tlie
tliis
109
powers required
to
speed are far greater
than were ever developed in those ships, and would equal the best recorded performances of the old type of This, of course, gives these
engine.
two ships a con-
siderable advantage, crediting them, in fact, w^ith greater
steaming powers than they have been shown to possess. All the other ships have exceeded 12J knots on trial, so that in estimating their capabilities there is no similar source of error. Table showing
the
Times and Distances for which the under-mentioned Steam before the Coal is exhausted.
Shijis can
Coal
Unamioiired ships
Duncan Bristol
..
INIersey
,
Galatea
..
Armoured Warrior
..
sliips
:
.,
Achilles
Minotaur
Belkrophon Hercules
Monarch
..
:-
Speed of 11 Knots.
I
any of the
further at both speeds than
the '•
'
]\ronarcl),'
"Warrior/
tea
Chap. v.
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
TO
'
'
iron-clads except
althougli she does not greatly surpass the
Bellerophon,' and
'
Hercules.'
The Gala'
cannot steam so far as those four ships, and but
slightly exceeds the
then, as
this
'
Minotaur
'
and
'
Achilles.'
So
far,
comparison goes, the iron-clads have a
decided advantage, on the whole, over the representatives of our
wooden
beaten by the *
I
'
fleet,
and most of them are only
Mersey,' which, with her sister-ship, the
Orlando,' stand alone in their very large coal supply. to these facts in order to
need add nothing
falseness of the impression that, in steaming
fully the
measured by the time the coal on board will
capacity, as last,
our wooden ships are superior to our iron-clads.
There
still
remains the question of the relative coal
supplies of our earlier
answer to which
The
show more
'
Monarch,'
and more recent
iron-clads, the
by the preceding
is
also supplied
it
will be observed, stands at the
table.
head
of the iron-clads in the times her coal will last at the
speeds taken. terval,
Next
come the
*
to her,
and
very small
at a
Warrior' and 'Hercules,' the
in-
latter
of which, with her improved engines, can do almost
much with her 600 tons of coal as the Warrior can The 'Bellerophon' stands in nearly with her 800.
as
'
the same position relatively to the '
Hercules
both the
below the
'
Hercules
'
occupies with respect to the
'
Achilles '
weights of
'
and
'
'
Minotaur
'
'
'
that the
Warrior
fall
; '
and
very much
Bellerophon,' although they carry greater coal.
So
far,
therefore,
from the recent
iron-clads being inferior in coal-carrying power (in pro-
portion to consumption) to the earlier armoured ships,
we
find that one of them, the 'Monarch,'
is
superior
1'
Chap. V.
to
Steamiyig of the Iron-Clads,
while
all,
superior to '
the
'
Bellerophon
and 'Hercules' are
'
named except
the
inferior to that vessel.
It
the other iron-clads
all
much
Warrior,' and are not
1 1
must be remembered
also that the
partial protection,
not burdened with anything like
is
weight of armour
so great a
as the
'
Warrior,' with her
'
Hercules
'
(the dif-
ference amounting to more than 500 tons), although
she
is
a considerably larger ship, and that she carries
armour than the Bellerophon.' I need scarcely say that this very great difference in favour of the defensive powers of the later ships far outweighs 114 tons
'
less
comparatively small difference in favour of the
the
steaming capability of the
'
Warrior
;
and a small de-
'
duction from the weights of armour would enable the coal supplies of the so increased as to
In
rior.'
fact, if
'
Bellerophon
make them the
'
'
and
'
Hercules
far superior to the
Warrior
'
is
to
'
be
War-
'
to be classed as
iron-clad alongside of the better protected ships,
it
an is
only proper to make some allowance for the fact that her coal supply has been made large at the expense of
The same thing is, in a measure,
her weight of armour.
of the other earlier
true
and
*
Achilles
waived,
and I '
'
we
'
—but,
find, as I
Hercules
'
iron-clads
even when
have
—the
*
Minotaur
this consideration is
said, that the
'
Bellerophon'
stand considerably above them.
must observe, with respect
to the
'
Acliilles
'
and
Minotaur,' that the results of the trials of steaming at
fixed speeds
made
in the
Channel Fleet of 1867 show
that their rates of coal consumption did not then occupy
the position relatively to the I
have assigned
to
them
'
Belleroj^hon's
in the
'
rate wliich
foregoing remarks.
explanation of this apparent discrepancy
is
to
'I'ho
be found
—
— Chap. v.
Steaming of the Iron-Clads,
112
in the fact that, during this cruise, the
'
Bellerophon's
'
superheaters, and other arrangements for economising
were not working at
fuel,
some
occasions,
all
satisfactorily, in fact,
were absolutely
ineffective
on
so that her
;
rate of consumption rose as high as the rates in ships
with the old type of engines. unfair to judge of the
'
It
would obviously be
Bellerophon's
'
capability
by her
performances under such circumstances, as the addi-
which had been put into her
tional weights
in order to
obtain greater economy were worse than useless; yet this has
been done on several occasions, as I shall show
in another chapter.
my
The more reasonable course
which
opinion, that
I
have followed,
is,
viz. to
in
take
the average results of our experience in various ships
an experience which, in the case of the new type, is rapidly becoming more extensive and thus to eliminate
—
the sources of error arising from differences in coal and stoking, as well as in the condition
For these
of the engines.
and management
reasons, therefore, I consider
the preceding figures to be
fair representations of the
steaming powers of the ships named.
As
I
have had frequent occasion
chapters to
make
Paper which
I read in
Architects, "
On
trials, I will
1867
Trials of
reprint here a
at the Institution of
Steam Ships
was as follows more common now,
Mile," and which is
and former
repeated reference to the great value
I set upon measured-mile
Nothing
in this
at the
Naval
Measured
:
in connection
with
steamsliip performances, than to hear the usual system
of trial at the measured mile condemned as unfair, deceptive,
longed
and
inferior in every respect to a
trial at sea.
We
more pro-
scarcely ever attend a steam-
3 ;
Chap. V.
Steaming of the Iron-Clads,
1
1
ship trial without hearing this opinion freely expressed it
;
frequently takes the form of a newspaper jDaragraph,
and
have even seen
I
stated in official
it
documents by
responsible persons.
Now,
order to
in
popular opinion to consider
satisfy
sound or
is
what are the
sured-mile
trial
objects
may
by other means.
may
In discussing the
not,
this
will be necessary
it
objects with wdiicli the
meawhether those
undertaken, and
is
plished
or
whether
ourselves
not be more satisfactorily accom-
first
borne in mind that the measured -mile convenience, come to
it
must be
trial
has, for
of these questions,
which
it
was
not, I presume, resorted to in the first instance,
and
w^hich
could
trial.
Among
fulfil
certainly
objects for
be as well effected by a sea
these objects, I
may mention
the testing
of the thorough efficiency of the boilers and engines
when
pressed to the
full
extent of their capabilities
the examination of the hull of the ship to the
when
subjected
extreme power of the engines, with the view
any w^eaknesses or leakages exist; the examination of the connections of the hull and the engines, such as thrust blocks and other bearers, and the various steam and water pipes which are more or of ascertaining
less intimately
if
attached to the hull
the draught to
the
boilers,
;
and the
trial
of
and of the ventilating
arrangements of the engine and boiler rooms generally.
very
All these objects may, satisfactorily
several hours
the test at sea
—
I think,
be accomplished
on a continuous full-speed
trial
of
away from a measured mile in f ict, would be more searching and thorough ;
in the case of the connections of the engines
and the
;
1
liiill,
be
Chap. v.
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
14
example
for
—when
performed
at sea than
when performed in smooth water only. The primary objects of the measured-mile which
not, how^ever, those
I
trial are
have already named, but
these, viz. the determination
power of a given
can
it
maximum
of the
ship's engines,
and the true
the ship under the propulsive action of that
and the determination of these
facts
steam
sj^eed of
power
under conditions
can be repeated in other ships, in order to
wliicli
afford scientific comparisons
between them.
sured mile
when
also resorted to
is
The mea-
the respective merits
of different forms of propellers have to be tested
;
and,
whenever exact comparisons have to be drawn between the performances of steamships under generally,
like external conditions.
Now
I,
one, cannot
for
moment admit
for a
adapted
a measured -mile trial for
as,
On
these objects. latter
we
system of
should be
satisfactory
of different
trial
were
comparisons shi23s,
the same ship
opinion because
accomplishing
the contrary, I believe that,
left utterly
that
adapted than, or so well
a prolouged
sea trial is better
to be replaced
if
the
by the former,
without the means of making
between
the
performances
or even between the performances of
at it
different times
appears to
me
;
and
I
am
of this
evident that in the
you must of necessity be subject to most of the disadvantages and derangements of the measuredsea trials
mile
trial,
together with another set of disadvantages
and derangements peculiar to the trial at sea. The objections to the measured -mile trial are, I It is presumed that the short duration believe, these of the runs upon the mile, with intervening periods :
— Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. V.
usually
of
what
called "jockeying," in
is
longer
duration,
way being
when
the mile, and letting
full
rush
when on
that
the
opportunity
affords
for
more ways than one of "bottling up" the steam
the chief off
115
into the cylinders at
it
mile;
presumed further
is
it
method of defining the length of the mile by
that the
the transit of posts or other objects on the land affords
opportunity for deception
made
;
that the tides are likewise
available for increasing the apparent speed, espe-
cially in
rivers
;
and, generally,
alleged that the
is
it
way
speed obtained on the measured mile in no
sents the actual steaming capabilities of the vessel
on actual
we
these
objections,
admit that
may
it
be,
its
necessary
is
abuses.
and very often
made the means of securing
for ships
To
deserved reputation for speed.
I freely
abused, and
is,
an utterly un-
an extent
so great
abuses sometimes carried that I have seen a
its
vessel
it
should very carefully discriminate between
the use of the measured mile and
are
when
service.
In dealing with that
repre-
whose maximum speed was
9
knots tried
in
such a manner as to secure an apparent speed of 11 knots, and have seen her announced in the news-
papers of the next day as having attained the latter speed.
On
one occasion
I observed, in addition to the
"jockeying" below, the open faced
—
—
1
may even
say the bare-
resort to three obvious sources of falsification.
These were
—
the running of the vessel in the
1,
when going with it, and near water when going against it 2,
strength of the tide
shore in slack
deduction of
tlie
;
full
the \\\
average speed from an odd number
of runs, of which the larger poj'tiou were
made with I
2
Steaming of the Iron-Clads,
ii6 the tide
mark when
;
and
3,
the bringing of a
This
for the mile.
it,
object
;
and the " dodge,"
if I
consisted in bringing the post on with the
side of the house.
I
tances involved, but
on as a
other end a post brought on
posts, at the
with the side of a house call
wrong
device will be understood
one end of the mile the marks
I explain that at
were two
last
Chap. v.
may
have not the dimensions and it
so
wrong dis-
easy to see from the accom-
is
panying diagram how the mile may be shortened by these means.
Presuming the breadth of the house the distance from it to the post 150
to be 21 feet,
and the
feet,
average distance of the vessel from the post 1500 feet,
you
will at once see that this device shortened the mile
by 210
A
feet,
reducing
it
from 6080
feet to
5870
feet.
speed of lOi knots would thus be made to appear
11 knots from this cause alone.
The other two modes
of securing a high nominal
result, viz. those of using the tide as a source of speed,
and the employment of an odd number of runs, are so manifest to every spectator that one almost
they are ever resorted nevertheless,
and
personal offence, I
to.
wonders
But they are resorted
to,
were not anxious to avoid giving would mention cases in which results
if I
that have been trumpeted to the world as extraordinary successes,
have been secured by these means.
And even
— ;
Steaming of the Iro7i-Clads.
Chap. V.
more than
may
this
be said
;
for I
long ago, on authority in which fidence, that in the case of a
announced
iiy
was informed not
I place implicit con-
very
steamship the
fast
was obtained by selecting three runs out of several two with the tide and one against it and even this one run against the tide was somehow brought out much higher than any other of the runs in the same direction. result
—
Now
let
me
say once for
all,
and without the
least
apprehension of effectual contradiction, that no one of these last-named causes of error official trials
Her
of
Majesty's ships under the system
which they now
ujDon
conducted.
Those
can enter into the
are,
trials
and
for long
are carried out
have been,
by a number
of perfectly independent officers of the Eoyal Navy,
who have no as
far
under
as
her
regards
definite
and who
responsibility whatever for
success
instructions,
the
report
who
results
authorities at Whitehall.
in
or
the vessel
failure,
who
act
record every result, full
The standard
detail
to
the
miles are mea-
sured and marked by hydrographic officers
;
the exact
by all on board and the trials are usually attended by gentlemen of the press, whose observation of the proceedings is very nature of the marks
is
well understood
and who are not usually slow in detecting errors
close,
in official operations.
On
the other hand, there are sources of error that
cannot well be avoided, which oj^erate against the success of vessels, the trials of It is indispensable trial
her
to the
speed
;
which are so conducted.
complete success of such a
that the vessel should fullest
full
come
in to the mile with
that that speed should be maintained
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
ii8
throughout the mile
;
Hne between the
that the shortest
mile-posts should be run;
Chap. V.
and that the
vessel's course
upon the mile should be maintained without the use of
Any
the rudder. ditions
must
departure from either of these con-
below
result in putting the apparent speed
the real speed
;
and
it is
to avoid a departure
during a prolonged
obviously very
trial of, say,
necessity for entering
difficult
indeed
from some one or more of them
The
half a dozen runs.
upon the mile
at full speed, for
maintaining that speed throughout the run, and for avoiding the resistance of the rudder, I
is
obvious
;
but
have found the necessity of running on the shortest
line
between the marks so
trouble
ill
appreciated that I will
you with a few words upon
it,
notwithstanding
the exceeding simplicity of the subject.
'^^ M.
..
f'.A
TAIL SP/T
-i4C^ iAlL SPIT
<S085K9RlMLE
We
have here a diagram of the measured mile at the Maplin Sands. Supposing a vessel that has to
;
Steaming of the Irou-Clads.
Chap. V.
run the mile to enter upon eastward,
it is
119
at the point P,
it
going
obvious that, in the absence of corrected
compasses and a proper prescribed course, and in the
may run upon
absence of marks aljead and astern, she
one of an indefinite number of Hues passiDg through that point, and intersecting the lines through the mile-
But
posts.
lines, viz. is
that which
is
all
those
perpendicular to the post
lines,
exactly a mile in length between those post lines;
every other line
A is
easy to see that only one of
it is
is
longer than a nautical mile.
line inclined at 5° to the true line, for
one inclined at '10^
longer by nearly 8 yards;
longer by 31 yards; one inclined at 15°
71 yards length
is
and
;
no
if
less
the
angle be
at if
20°, the
than 130 yards.
culation will show^ that a vessel
14 knots will appear
running on the
to be
A
which
line inclined at 5°
and
13*52 knots
to
to 13*15
if
if
is
is
longer by
cal-
really steaming at 13*94 knots
on if
is
increase of
very simple
steaming
the 14 knots will be reduced to 13*71 10° line;
example,
tlie
true line
running on the
running on the 15° line;
running on the 20°
line.
Now,
at the
very important mile at Stokes' Bay, there w^ere no
marks whatever
to define the true course of the ship
(except in the clearest weather, objects wx're visible) ralty, at
my
earnest request, laid
which answer admirably.
mouth It
is still
when certain distant when the Admidown suitable buoys,
until recently,
The measured mile
at Ply-
deficient of these valuable guides.
would be easy
to
show
that
in
observing
tlio
transit of the poles or other objects great delicac}' of
observation place.
is
Such
necessary trials are,
when any important in fact,
trial
takes
as I lrei|iienlly
lia\e
— ]
20
Iron-Clads,
Steaming of the
Chap. v.
occasion to observe, not trials of knots, but trials of fractions of knots
;
and these turn upon a few seconds
more or less. This is really a very important point, and one which is too little considered. It is often of great
moment
that a ship should attain a defined speed
In the case of the
in knots.
Bellerophon,' for ex-
^
was very satisfactory to me, and to persons of much more importance than myself, that a speed of ample,
it
The
14 knots should be attained. attained
was very nearly 14^
average run of 4 min. 13
actual average speed
knots, represented
Now
on the mile.
sec.
by an a
on the runs would have put
difference of only 5 sec.
the speed below 14 knots, and slight as the deficiency
would have been, amounting knot only,
it
and enemies
would have been ample
At low
importance. all.
for one's rivals
have raised an outcry about.
to
have often done so on all.
five-hundredths of a
to
less
grounds
speeds, a second or
At very high
They
is, on none at two are of much less ;
that
speeds, the seconds are all in
To
enforce these facts, I will give a few figures
At
a speed of 6 knots, a loss of 54 seconds would
only occasion a
At
loss of | a
7 knots, the ^-knot
:
knot of speed.
would be
lost
by
a loss of
39 seconds.
At
8
knots,
the
J-knot
would be
lost
seconds.
At At At At At
9 knots, it
would be
lost in
10 knots, in 18 seconds. 11
„
15
„
12
„
13
„
13
„
11
„
23 seconds.
in
30
1
Chap. V.
Stea77ting
At 14 At 15 At 16 At 17 At 18 At 19
of the Iro?i-Clads.
1
knots, in 9 seconds. „
8
„
7
„
„
G
„
„
5
„
4
„
„
These considerations show how necessary conduct the
measured-mile
scientific results are to
this part of the subject, I
be obtained.
to
if truthful
Before quitting
must, however, submit a few
upon the "jockeying"
observations
is
it
of steamships not
trials
only with impartiality but w^ith great care
and
2
to
which
I
have
already referred.
In the boiler-room the chief "jockeying" possible is,
in
my
opinion, that of selecting better coal in one
case than
another, and this
should, T think, be got rid
Royal Navy
at least, the
of a given description best jorocurable.
may
of,
be got rid
by
of,
and
prescribing, in the
uniform and invariable use
of coal, which should be the
It is well
known
that the heating
power of different descriptions of very materially, and it is only from the of the same kind on all trial trips that
or steam -generating coal differs
use of coal
similar comparative results can be
me
to observe,
obtained.
Allow
however, that changes in coal can only
influence the development of power,
The
formances of ships.
latter are,
and not the perof course, pro-
portioned to the power developed, no matter by what
means that power
is
obtained.
It
is,
therefore, for
the purposes of comparison between the engines and boilers of different ships, or
between those of
different
Chap. V-
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
122 makers, that
kind of coal
it ;
desirable
is
almost indispensable. that the
may
may
It
management
the stoking,
use always the same
to
and for those purposes that condition of the
is
occur to some to say
fires, or,
in other words,
greatly modify the quantity of steam
and power developed, and
But
this is perfectly true.
the only means of approaching a standard in this respect is,
in
my
opinion, to aim at doing the utmost in every
by employing the same
case,
and that
staff
staff of stokers
and
others,
of the most efficient kind, on every occa-
And this
what we practically do at Portsmouth and other Government ports in the trials of H.M.'s ships. In the engine - room there will always, I fear, be sion.
is
some scope
for " jockeying," but I believe this scope is
practically
much
of H.M.'s ships
trials
of several engineer consideration that,
many
than
less
limited
is
it
imagine.
In the
by the supervision by the general
as well as
officers,
upon the whole,
it is
very doubtful
whether frequent interference with the valves does not conduce to priming and to other derangements such an extent as to make
to
the
let
engines
and
ously throughout the tation
on
point,
this
" jockeys " present,
observer in this respect state that
the
every
officers in
on the very
effort is
;
best
to
continu-
speak with some hesi-
I
as there
and as
more advisable
do their
boilers trial.
it
may am
I really
be
experienced
but an amateur
but I can with certainty
made
in the public service
charge to make the
trials truthful,
last trial I attended, the captain of the
by and
steam
reserve forbade any interference with the engines during
the whole period of the It
only remains for
trial.
me
to state
why
I consider
the
Steaming of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. V.
prolonged
and you
trial,
scientific
at sea
trial
inferior
123
the measured-mile
to
already have seen that
will
grounds that
I give
it
is
the preference.
it
on In
the brief and manageable trial at the measured mile
you
can,
when
fully prepared, really develope for a
given period the
under
most
the
also observe
power of the
full
favourable
and engines
boilers
and can
circumstances,
with exactness the speed obtained by the
But send a day, or even half a day (12 once lose the assurance that you
ship under the impulsion of that power.
the ship to sea for
you at power of the boilers and engiaes and the speed of the ship, and find that you are really hours), and
are trying the
testing not these, but
and engineers. I
appeal
to
This
endurance of the stokers
the
the vital part of the question.
is
the experience
of
whether, even in ocean races, contested races race
was
to
their steamer.
is
present,
It is
solely
and ask
possible in closely
satisfy the beaten
simply and
lost
it
all
party that the
by the
inferiority of
not possible, because
it is
not the
real qualities of the steamers that in all cases, or often, decide such contests.
and
even
In the most important
interesting ocean race that I ever attended (that
between the vessel lost
'
Helicon
much
call
the accidents
(the
*
Helicon
')
maximum
'
and
'
Salamis
')
of her credit owing to of the stoke-hold.
we knew
that
we
fell
the
what
faster I
may
In one vessel greatly short of
owing to our deficiencies in this respect; in fact, we had to go upon the first grade of expansion, and work easily for fourteen and in the other vessel, hours out of twenty-seven the defeat which they even then sustained was boldly our
speed,
;
;
Chap. v.
Steami7ig of the Iroii-Clads,
124 attributed
inferior
to
would ever be
The longer the
otherwise. is j)assed,
And
coal.
believe,
I
so,
it
whether by racing or
in ocean trials^
trial, after
a certain length
the less satisfactory will be the result as a
means of comparison with other
You
results.
can
comj)are the results obtained on measured-mile trials
and although the formulae which we apply
to those
results for obtaining the " constants " are but exceed-
ingly imperfect standards of excellence, that does not
from the validity of the results themselves,
detract
which
are, in
my
opinion, far
that could be obtained
viewed as data
more valuable than any
by prolonged
sea trials,
when
and practical comparisons
for scientific
between ships and engines. In conclusion, chapter
is
let
me
say that
my
object
in
not to oppose the resort to prolonged
at sea for other purposes.
sumption of
this trials
For ascertaining the con-
fuel, for finding
out the most economical
steaming speed, for comparing the load and light performances of vessels, and for purposes which
it
many
would be easy
trial is invaluable, indispensable.
tain
is
that
the
measured-mile
to
other important
name
—the
ocean
All I desire to maintrial
is
also a
very
valuable one for other and equally important purposes,
and that
it is
an
that the trial at
pensed with.
and a very serious one, to suppose the mile could with advantage be dis-
error,
Chap. VI.
Sailing of the
Iron-CIads.
CHAPTER
125
YI.
SAILING OF THE IROX-CLADS.
The steaming shown
qualities of our iron-clad
the question arises.
under
How do these
although
this subject,
wholly secondary to the steaming question,
demand
cient to
to give to
The
it
suffi-
in this chapter.
capacity for sea
own, which its
is
the brief consideration which I propose
service
must always form a
prominent feature in the navy of a country
upon
power
our
like
essentially maritime, depends mainly
is
at sea for its position
of Europe, and has ^possessions in
among
all jDarts
the nations
of the world.
Our wooden steam navy had gradually been made efficient as to
both at
as
armoured ships behave
The importance of
sail ?
navy being,
preceding chapter, highly satisfactory,
in the
so
be capable of performing these services,
home and
abroad,
most
sailing qualities of the ships
The
satisfactorily.
were not
to
any very
great extent diminished by their possession of steam-
power
;
and the
latter
was generally employed,
cially in the earlier periods, as
than as a substitute
an auxiliary
for, sailing
power.
In
to,
es^Je-
rather
fact,
the
comparatively limited time which the coal carried by
any ship would enable her to proceed under steam alone would have rendered the performance of long voyages and distant or cruising services almost impossible without a considerable spread of sail.
.
I '2
Sailing of the Iron- Clads
6
The
necessity
intended for such services
was
wooden
in our
fleet
;
in
capability
sailing
for
is,
v
c h ap.
.
i
iron-clads
no doubt, as great as
it
but as a considerable number
of our armoured ships were mainly intended for Euro-
pean
service,
and more particularly
they have had the latest
much
wooden
less sail-power
line-of-battle ships
Channel
service,
given them than
and
were
frigates
All our iron-clads, however, have a
provided with. certain
for
amount of sail-power
as well as steam-power,
except those specially constructed for coast defence and
ramming, and the new turret-ships Thunderer' and Devastation,' which have an unusually large coal sup-
for '
ply,
^
and can keep the sea
which are not intended
for a considerable time, but
perform the distant voyages
to
and continuous sea services which cruising ships in our
Navy have
to undertake.
proportion of sail-power in
The comparatively small
many
of our iron-clads
is
partly due to the desirability of reducing the weights,
and partly
to the desire to avoid as
much
risk of fouling their screw propellers
wreck of masts,
spars,
greatly diminished
not
lift.
In the
'
by the
during action by
The
and rigging.
canvas as these ships possess has, in
as possible the
of sucli
effect
most of them, been
fact that their propellers
do
Warrior,' and some other ships with
made
unprotected sterns, the screws have been
to
lift
in
order to prevent this diminution of sailing capability
;
and some of the iron-clads now building have been But this is not the case with the similarly contrived. '
Achilles,'
many
'
Minotaur,'
other ships.
'
In the
Bellerophon,' '
Bellerophon
the sailing has been further checked
giving exceedingly
'
'
Pallas,'
and
'
and
Pallas,'
by the engineers
fine pitches to the screws, so that
Chap. VI.
Sailing of the Iro7i-Clads,
they stand
almost directly across
having the
effect
"toggling"
the
of
127 ship's
tlie
patli,
what is technically known as But in spite of all these some of them are, it cannot be
vessel.
drawbacks, serious as
said that the sailing performances of the iron-clads are,
The Eeports of the Admirals in command of the Channel Fleet afford the best means of forming a judgment upon this point, on the whole,
unsatlsf^ictory.
and a few extracts from these Reports
will doubtless
prove interesting. In the Report of Rear- Admiral Sir Sydney Dacres,
we
for 1864,
find the following statements.
During
the passage from Lisbon to Portland, the sailing of the
and Black Prince was good, enabling them to keep company with the Edgar (screw line-of-battle ship) under sail only. Captain (now Admiral) Hornby, '
Warrior
'
'
'
'
'
of the latter vessel, observes that, though under '
Edgar
" has generally an advantage
'
" as well as in steaming, the finer " of the iron ships give his
;
sail,
bows and long
them a great
the
in a head sea, floors
superiority."
In
remarks on the qualities of the iron-clads (see page
8 of the Parliamentary Return),
of the
^
Warrior
'
and
'
Admiral Dacres says
Black Prince
'
that, "
" at present rigged, their sailing qualities on a
" long stretches
make them equal
to
even as
wind on
keeping pace with
" vessels of the old class," and then adds, " the great "
drawback
to the
many
excellencies of this class
is
" that their extreme length interferes with their handi" ness in
many most important
points."
points in wliich this unhandiness
wearing and staying under of the ships
when
scudding.
sail,
was
Among
felt,
other
he mentions
and the rouuding-to
These drawbacks were.
'
128
Chap. VI.
Sailing of the Iron-Clads,
of course, incidental to the great lengths, and not to
In the course of his
the armour-plating of the ships.
further observations, he states that the short ship) "
'
Defence
'
(a
handy in wearing and stays as any " one could desire " and that the Prince Consort and Eoyal Oak (two of the short converted ships of the 'Caledonia' class) '' are handy though slow under Admiral Yelverton (in his Report for 1866) "sail." as
is
;
'
'
'
,
says,
with respect to the sailing powers of the iron-
clads
:
"
On
both these occasions
was
I
able to judge of
" the performance of the squadron, blowing hard and " with a heavy sea, and have no hesitation in saying " that, under all
ordinary circumstances of bad
the
" weather in the Atlantic, I see no reason to apprehend " that the ships of this squadron
" weather of
it
He
two
^
excepts
Hector,'
than any of our line-of-battle ships." vessels
from
this
statement,
which has always proved an
and the turret-ship
boat,
would make worse
'
Wivern.'
the
inferior sea-
In his remarks on
the individual merits and deficiencies of the ships, the
Admiral
states that the
"sea-boat,"
although
'
Achilles
is
'
"a
safe
and good
''from her great length most
"difficult to handle;" that the Bellerophon "is " weatherly both in light and strong winds," although,
as he supposes, the very large area of the balanced
way
rudder tends
'
" under
and often causes her
the
'
sail,"
'
to stop
Lord Clyde,'
'
the ship's
Ocean,'
and
'
too
suddenly
to miss stays
Caledonia,'
;
that
though
not equal to the old line-of-battle ships as regards their sailing capabilities, are
that the
most
efficient
ships
'Pallas' (as quoted in Chapter
" occasions of sailing, whether on a
I.)
war "on all
of
wind or going
;
free,
— Chap. VI.
''
—
Sailing
liYOved
of the Iro7i-Clads. superior
far
lierself
" squadron," adding, " I
"of
sailing,
" other days
may
i2g
the
to
of
rest
the
safely class her, in point
with some of our good 36-gun frigates of "
and
;
" all times both
the
tliat
when
'
Research
'
"
well at
sails
and going
close-hauled
free."
In Rear-Admiral Warden's Report to Admiral Yelverton on the behaviour of the ships during the same cruise,
we
them placed
find
the following order
in
of precedence as regards performance under '
Pallas/ 'Research,'
'
Achilles,'
'
'
Be-llerophon,'
Lord Clyde,' and "
Warden adds "
power carried
*•
generally
it
With regard by the several
is
quite
'
'
Ocean,'
'
sail
:
Hector,'
Admiral
Caledonia.'
to the quantity of sailships, I should say that
sufficient
nor do
;
I
think
it
" ought to be less, considering the various duties they
"
may
"that '*
be called upon to perform it
;
nor do I consider
could be increased \vith advantage, or without
incurring the risk of impairing their efficiency under
" steam.
It is quite sufficient for all
" for assisting
" stations,
for
them the
to
general purposes,
mak^ long passages
purpose
of
economising
to distant fuel
on
"general service, as has been exemplified during the " last month."
Admiral Yelverton's report confirms the accuracy of these remarks but both officers agree in the opinion that, if the fleet were required to perform ;
evolutions under
power them.
sail, all
to ensure a certain
the ships would need steam-
and promjit performance of
Admiral Yelverton further
states,
however,
now rigged, they are able to keep " their positions in any assigned latitude and longitude, that, " as they are
" tacking,
and even wearing, with
little
doubt, pro-
" vided there .he plenty of sea-n^om, and llml tlu^y are
K
'
Sailing of the
130
I7'on-Clads.
Chap. Vl.
" not in line, nor called on to perform any manoeuvres
These are conditions which
or evolutions of a fleet."
''
in
are,
most
cases, satisfied
when
vessels are cruising
or proceeding on long voyages; and the fact that
modern naval renders
it
mud
battles
all
he fought under steam
comparatively unimportant that our iron-
clads cann\)t perform all the evolutions ^of a fleet undei
canvas as certainly or speedily as our old sailing ships could.
It
ciencies in
must be remembered
manoeuvring power under
measure due
sail
are in some
to the fact that the iron-clads are screw
steam-ships, and said,
that these defi-
also
that
many
in
the propeller cannot be
of them, as I
lifted, this
have
disadvantage
being incurred in order to secure other advantages
Admiral Warden's Report on the
in time of action. trials
of the Channel Fleet in 1867 does not give
much
additional information on the sailing qualities of the ships,
beyond the
fact that the
change in the Achilles' '
rig from four to three masts led to a far better per-
formance
;
and the remarks respecting the apparent
falling-off in the
performance of the 'Pallas' (previously
referred to), which
is
only explainable on the ground
of management,
of difference
the
ship
and her rig
having remained unaltered.
The Eeport on the Channel Fleet for 1868 does not throw much additional light upon the sailing capability of our iron-clads.
Two
trials
of sailing took place on
the 20tli and 29th June, the details of which are given in
a tabular form
occasions the trial *'
'
and the
plain sail,"
Bellerophon
by Admiral Warden. On both was made " on a wind under all
'
was
last.
'
Warrior
The
'
'
was
Pallas
'
first,
while the
was second on
Cmap. VI.
Sailing of the Iron-Clads,
the 20th, and fifth on the 29th, thus proving that lier
power had not really fallen off, as had been inferred by some persons from her performance in The Defence was tliird on both trials, and 1867. sailing
^
the
'
'
Achilles
on the special
first
'
high position, being fourth
also took a
and second on the other
trial
remarks need,
I think,
be
No
trial.
made regarding
the
performances of the remaining ships of the squadron.
With
respect to the
will be sufficient to
'
Bellerophon's
performance,
'
remark that these two
trials
it
only
showed, to quote from Admiral Ryder's Report, that she " was the slowest of the eight ships on that point " of sailing, viz., on a
wind under
all
plain sail,"
that the results of previous trials have
shown
real position, as regards sailing capability,
appear to
is
garding the sailing of our iron-clads that the
good
*
among
much higher than be from those trials. To these
ships of the squadron
Hercules
it
the
would
facts
re-
only add
I shall
has also been shown to be a very
'
and
vessel undersail,
squadron
officers in the
and
that her
is
in the opinion of one of the
"next best
to the ^Warrior.'"
In this vessel the jointed balanced rudder admits of
being used as an ordinary rudder alone, and
by
when under
means the rapid stoppage of the way
this
caused by the simple balanced rudder of the phon,' is
when
she
is
going about,
is
facts will
serve to
iron-clads, whatever
their
power
also.
'J1ie
BcUero-
st
show the reader imperfections
ships, are not deficient in sailing
are recpiisite in
'
prevented, and there
consequently not the same liability to miss
These
sail
powers as
as
tliat oui-
sailing
far as they
sea-going cruisers possessing steamcapability of these ships to undertake
.
Chap,
Sailing of the Iron- Clads,
132
vI
the inost distant voyages cannot, however, be better
by a brief reference to the performances of one or two of them, and those not by any means the best sea-boats of the armoured fleet. Lord Henry Lennox, in one of his speeches on the Navy Estimates in
illustrated than
made by
1868, referred to a voyage iron-clad
'
Ocean
In the course of
from the Mediterranean
'
converted
the
to Batavia.
voyage the ship encountered very
this
severe weather, especially after passing the meridian
Good Hope on the way to St. mid-ocean. Some idea of the violence
of the Cape of
Paul's
Island in
of this
may
storm
be obtained from the fact that every boat at
the davits was stove. subject, observed
this ''
gone through
He *'
it
One
—" No
better,
of the officers, writing on
wooden ship could have and a good many worse."
stated that " under sail alone
also
12 knots," and that the runs
from 195
to
243 knots, the
we have gone
made per day
latter
varied
giving an average
speed of more than 10 knots per hour.
If
any
addi-
were required of the capability of our ironproceed to any part of the world, the voyage
tional proof clads to
of the
'
Zealous
tioned, as
to
Vancouver's Island might be men-
she also
encountered heavy weather and
'
behaved admirably.
At
the same time I cannot help believing that, if
had not resorted clads,
we
to excessive length in the earlier iron-
we might have looked
for better
average per-
formances in the squadron generally, and should have set up a higher standard of capabihty in all the essential
factory
now
movements of ships under sail. It is satisto know that two of the powerful iron-clads
building, the
'
Swiftsure
'
and
'
Triumph,' are to
'
Chap. VI.
Sailing of the Iron-Clads.
133
carry lifting screws, and will have a large spread of
canvas
;
and
Devastation/
'
so that the construction
without
the
of the
'
Thunderer
compromises
drawbacks which the presence of masts and impose, will be attended
and sj^ars
by the construction of other
ships for distant service possessing superior qualities as sailing vessels.
Rolling of the
134
Iron-CIads.
CHAPTER ROLLING OF THE
There
yil. RON-C LADS.
no feature in the performances of our
is
clad sliips
1
Chap. vii.
which has heen
so
much
misrepresented and
From
misunderstood as that of their rolKng at sea. the reports and criticisms of some persons,
appear that these ships
roll to
excessive in comparison with
and
frigates
;
it
an extent which
wooden
would is
most
line-of-hattle ships
and that in a very moderate sea-way the open their
cannot
iron-clads
iron-
main -deck ports and
guns without shipping large quantities of hope to give the reader the means of judging
fight their
water.
I
for himself as to the
correctness
of
views in
these
the course of the following remarks, hut think
deny that they are true. In our iron-clads heing heavy rollers
all
several of
being
them are remarkable
much
as
for their
superior in this respect to
proper
fact, instead
at once to
of
it
alleged,
steadiness,
the
wooden
ships, while the great majority are at least equal in
steadiness to the line-of-battle ships
support of this statement
and
frigates.
I will refer to a
Eeports of the Admirals in
command
In
few of the
of the Channel
Admiral Smart says that the iron-clads he had with him in 1863 (which are by no means the steadiest of our ships) did not roll more than the screw Revenge.' From Admiral Dacres' line-of-battle ship Squadron.
'
Report
for 1864, it appears that the
'Edgar'
line-of-
Chap. VII.
Rolling of tJie Iron-Clads,
1
battle ship rolled tlirougli greater angles than iron-clads, exceeding is
even the
'
any of the
Prince Consort,' which
considered a comparatively inferior performer
the armoured ships.
35
among
Admiral Yelverton's Eeport
for
18G6, and Admiral Warden's Reports for 1867 and 18G8,
do not bear directly upon this point, as there were no of-battle ships in the
the
maximum
line-
squadrons but from the records of ;
angles rolled through,
it
appears that
several of the iron-clads behaved better than
wooden
ships would have done under similar circumstances.
The
trials
of French ships also go to prove that the
iron-clads do not roll excessively, in comparison with
wooden
I will
ships.
from the
re2:)orts
give one example of
this,
taken
of the squadron which was tried at sea in
In the heaviest weather the ships experienced on
1863.
this occasion, three out of five
than the
'
These
clads
;
more than the wooden answer to the
facts constitute a general
so often
a
less
Tourville' line-of-battle ship, and the other two
iron-clads rolled very little
ments
armoured ships rolled
more
made
as to the
detailed
I will first turn,
answer
heavy rolling of the
ship. state-
iron-
will be given further
however, to the question of their
o]i.
figlit-
ing capabilities in a sea-way, as to wliich the public have
been equally misinformed.
Here, again,
I
must
refer to
the records of the trials of our Cliannel Squadrons, and I will
guide.
show
take Admiral Warden's Report for 1867 as our
The long that,
series of trials recorded in this
Report
with one exception (the 'Lord Clyde'),
all
guns on
all
the iron-clads could have fought
all
their
occasions, altliough in doing so they would, on several
occasions, have shipped water thiough the main-deck ports.
This shipping of water
is
not an unusual thing
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
136 in
wooden war
ships,
of a fact which
is
and naturally leads
Chap. vii.
to the
mention
frequently overlooked in the discus-
sion of this question
Our
of rolling.
iron-clads are
guns
frigates, carrying, at least, the greater part of their
on the main deck
;
but they are nearly
and many of them are larger than,
The
line-of-battle ship,
decks
;
all
as large as,
line-of-battle ships.
however, had at
and frequently, when the ship
least
two gun-
rolled heavily,
the lower-deck ports had to be closed, and the main-
deck guns only could be fought. This difference between
armoured ships and
line-of-battle ships
They expect the
speakers.
seems to have
many
writers
and
iron-clad, with her
gun
entirely escaped the observation of
deck, say, 8 feet above water, to fight her guns in as
heavy weather as that in which a wooden two-decker could fight her main-deck guns, carried, say, 15 feet
above water, when the lower-deck guns of the
would be rendered entirely
useless
by the
sea
latter
washing
over the ports, and necessitating their being closed.
Tins
is
obviously most unfair and imj)roper
;
but I
may
remark, in passing, that the wisdom of giving armoured
upper-deck batteries to iron-clads recent sliips
—hence becomes
—
as has
apparent.
been done in It
need only
be added that in such dissimilar vessels as iron-clads
and
line-of-battle ships the
number of guns which can
be fought affords no test of the comparative rolling;
and
it is
frequently found that the iron-clad frigates can
main-deck guns in weather when wooden frigates would have to close their ports. fight their
Before proceeding to
examine the records of the
actual rolling of our iron-clads, I desire to call attention to a
few popular but erroneous impressions on the sub-
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. VII.
ject.
One
of the most generally received of these
belief that the sides
tend to
make
armoured ships
Comparing an
iron-clads
To
roll.
;
but this
is
unpro-
the
top-heaviness
"
real.
iron-clad with a line-of-battle ship,
we
and with a single
although the sides are covered w^ith
so that,
;
'''
more apparent than
find the former with less lofty sides,
gun-deck
the
is
heavy weights of armour carried on the
fessional eye there does appear to be a in
137
armour, the weights, as a whole, are not carried so high out of the water.
more
fully, I will take
say, of the
Caledonia
'
their sides cut its
down
this point
the case of a converted iron-clad, '
class.
The two-decked wooden
which were turned into armoured
ships
and
For the sake of illustrating
frigates
had
considerably, and the main deck
battery removed
;
while the armour, although
about equal in weight to the parts removed,
is
not as
The iron-clad is, therefore, less topheavy than the wooden ship was jDreviously to being
high above water. converted
;
of bringing
in other words, the conversion has the effect
down
the centre of gravity of the ship.
by
truth of this has been confirmed
and
The
actual experiment
calculation for several converted ships,
and
it
is
equally true of iron-built armoured vessels that they are less over- weigh ted than,
The
wooden
line-of-battle ships.
fallacy of the popular impression will, however,
be seen
still
more
clearly from a consideration of the
behaviour of actual ships.
known, two
The French have,
vessels, the ^Solferino'
as
is
well
and Magenta,' whicli '
are remarkable for being the only two-decked iron-clads
Their external appearance
ever
l)uilt.
nary
line-of-battle ships,
which are
with
" spur-shaped,"
tlie
and
is
that of ordi-
exception of the bows, sjjecially
constructed
Rollhig of the Iron-Clads.
8
for
and
They have two
ramming. their
armour extends
tiers of protected
to the upper-deck.
overweighting on the upper portion
any
iron-clad,
ships,
is
to be
guns,
Now,
if
found in
will assuredly be found in these
high
with a gun-deck more than ordinary iron-clads
and with
possess,
height
should it
it
Chap. VII.
armour reaching
their
to so great a
so that, according to the popular belief, they
;
So
roll excessively.
appears from French
far
official
from
this
being the case,
reports that these vessels
are far superior not only to the other iron-clads but
wooden two-deckers tried on the same occaThe explanation of this singularly good beha-
also to the sions.
viour will be given hereafter
;
but, for the present, it
will suffice to say that this practical disproof of the cor-
rectness of the popular view admits of no answer. It is not surprising,
ordinary iron-clads
*^
however, that those
who
think
top-heavy " should also believe
that ships with a small " free-board/' or height of side
above water, must be very steady
;
repeatedly set forth, in the press
and elsewhere, as a
natural corollary to the other.
in fact, the one
The
special subject in
connection with which these remarks are
quently made
is
the
relative
turret-ships
and broadside
supposed to
roll
much
facts contradict the
less
merits
most
fre-
of low-decked
iron-clads, the former being
Here again and show that low-
than the
general
is
belief,
latter.
decked ships are not necessarily steadier than ordinary vessels.
For instance, the turret-ship
'
Wivern,'
be-
longing to the Royal Navy, has a low free-board (about
4
feet),
ment
is
and
is
very lightly armoured, while her arma-
also very light.
Yet on one occasion her
be-
haviour at sea was so bad that she had to be brought
'
.
C HAP.
V
head
to
Rolling of the Iron- Clads,
1 1
wind
in order to
prevent
lier
139
shipping large, and,
of course, dangerous, quantities of water, the extreme
angle of
roll rising to
27 degrees each way. This
may be
is
not a
The Prinz Hendrik a Dutch turret-ship which once received much also has rolled so heavil^^, when in the trough of the praise sea, as to make it very desirable to bring her head to wind. In contrast with this heavy rolling of low-decked ships, we can point to the Achilles,' which, according to Admiral Warden's Report, was comparatively quite steady singular case, as
supposed.
'
—
—
'
in the trough of the sea
under very similar circum-
stances,
although she has lofty armoured sides
to the
Hercules,' the steadiness of which ship
'
known.
It will
;
and is
also
well
scarcely be asserted, in the face
of
by diminishing the height of a ship above water, and by this means alone, rolling may be almost entirely prevented. There can be no doubt that these facts, that
ships of the monitor type are, in general, very steady,
although the reports of their commanding
officers
show
that they sometimes roll considerably, but this steadiness is
in a great
measure due
to the fact that the
waves wash
over their decks instead of striking against, and running u}),
the sides.
Very
serious disadvantages, of course,
accompany the steadiness of these
In this place
vessels.
I need only mention those connected with working the
turret
guns
in a
heavy
sea.
over an ordinary monitor, she
AVhen waves are breaking
may remain
comparatively
steady, but the guns, being at such a small lieight out
of waler, could only at alL
bably
lie
i'oiight
with
difiiciilty, if ibiiglil
In similar weather a broadside ship would proroll
seen, this
more than a monitor (although, is
not necessarily the case), but,
as
we have
having been
;
Rolling of the
140
Iron-Clads.
Chap. VII.
constructed with lofty sides for the very purpose
of
fighting her guns under such circumstances, she could
do so safely
and surely the
;
broadside
capability the
ship
superior
is
outweighs the greater occasional
The reader
monitor.
not
will
fighting
that in
fact
more than of
steadiness to
fail
the
remark
also
that the low-decked ships hitherto built are not sea-
going, in the proper sense of the term, although proposals have been
made
them
to use
for sea service
whereas broadside ships can, as I have shown, longest passages, and
make
the
encounter storms, with perfect
safety.
Another point deserving notice tained
by many
mere weight,
that
the belief enter-
is
irrespective of height
out of water, tends to produce excessive rolling in ironclads.
This
an error, as the records of
also
is
prove that the heaviest steadiest less '
— the
than the
'
shijos
are also, in most cases, the
example, rolling
Hercules,' for
Pallas,'
In
Eesearch.'
is
'
fact,
trials
and the
'
Bellerophon
the heavier a ship
is
'
much
than the
the greater
the resistance she offers to being set rolling, a state-
ment which are
all
it
is
scarcely necessary to illustrate, as
familiar with the fact.
It
even then
it
true that great
is
weight tends to sustain motion when
we
it
does not increase rolling.
has begun, but
In
fact, as far
as the mathematical theory of rolling goes, a ship's
behaviour
is
entirely independent of her weight, although
the heavier ship has the advantage of requiring a greater effort to set
her rolling, and
is
therefore, cceter is paribus,
steadier than a lighter vessel.
proper to
state, that
the
In this connection
it is
amount of armour carried does
not influence a ship's rolling as
many
suppose
it
does.
Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
The Minotaur and '
'
'
141
Achilles/ for instance, are equally
and weight of their and other ships, quite as
steady, althoug'h the arrangement
armour are
so
very different
;
dissimilar in these respects, are very similar in their
The form of
rolHng.
by some persons
to
a ship's bottom has been thought
have a great
effect
on her
rolling,
but this does not appear to be true, within the limits of
form which are met with in actual regards easiness of motion, which
by the form of the
is
ships, except as
largely influenced
ship in the neighbourhood of the
These are some of the chief popular views
water-line.
on the subject of the rolling of iron-clads which require to be set right,
and the consideration of which
will not,
I think, be unprofitable to the reader.
The
difficulties
with which a naval architect has to
grapple in designing a steady iron-clad are not, and
from the nature of the case can hardly the public.
For instance,
it
is
be, realised
not generally
that a ship's rolling depends largely upon,
relation to the time
in
and varies
waves she encounters
with, the character of the
by
known in
which she would perform an
oscillation if set rolling in
still
water.
A
vessel
may
be very steady under some circumstances, and yet she
may
fall in
with waves of even
less
magnitude, but
of such a " period " as to gradually increase the angles
which she rolls. This can be illustrated from Admiral Warden's Re[)ort. The Warrior' and 'Lord
to
'
Warden' and
rolled
very similarly on several occasions,
might reasonably have been assumed that they would behave alike under most circumstances but on it
;
some ill
trials,
the only change in the circumstances being
the state of the sea, the
*
Warrioi-' rolled
much
less
'
Rolling of the
142
than the
'
I7^on-Clads.
Similar remarks apply to
Lord Warden.'
the relative rolling of the sister ships
and
'
Lord Clyde/ the
'
Lord Warden
latter in general rolling
more heavily, but on one occasion being the former.
This case
Chap. VII.
is
steadier than
an
also interesting as
tion of the fact that sister ships, built
any ship may encounter, and
if
The
he can do
is to
he could, the attempt
which should be-
different " periods."
new
give such properties to the
as experience has
shown
de-
the weather which
w^ould be hopeless to produce a ship
have equally well in weaves of
illustra-
from the same
drawings, do not always behave similarly. signer, of course, cannot predict
much
desirable
;
and
All
vessel
this has,
consider, in the great majority of cases, been done
I
satis-
factorily in our iron-clads.
Besides the influence of the wave-period upon a ship's rolling, there is the farther consideration that
changes in
the weights carried produce corresponding changes in the rolling.
These changes are
to
some extent unavoidable,
being in a war ship principally due to variations in the quantity of coals, provisions, ammunition, and stores on board.
In any criticisms on the rolhng of iron-clads
on particular occasions,
it is
consequently necessary to
take into account not only the state of the sea, but also the stowage of the ship, as otherwise very false opinions
may
be entertained.
The
construction of the hull also
exercises considerable influence on rolling. built iron-clad,
for
example,
structed from an iron-built
is
A
wood-
very differently con-
armoured
vessel,
and the
proportion of the weight of hull to the total w^eight of the ship and her lading (in other words, to the total
displacement) also differs very considerably in the two
Rolling of the Iron-Ctads,
Chap. VII.
The
ships.
centre of gravity of
These
paratively low. fiict
which the
143
wood
tlie
liiill
is
com-
tend to prepare us for the
facts
of the Channel Fleet have de-
trials
veloped, viz. that on the whole wood-built ships roll
more than those
built of iion.
The manner in which the observations of a ship's made and recorded necessarily forms an important feature in any remarks on her qualities. In our own Navy, the records are made in accordance with a detailed scheme of instructions issued by the rolling are
Admiralty, and embrace accounts of the state of the sea,
and
and direction of the wind
force
and course
draught,
the ship
of
the stowage,
;
and
;
the
angles
number of oscillations The two last-named features supply infor-
rolled through, as well as the
pur minute.
mation as to the range and the rate of the
The
respectively.
ship's rolling
recorded are always the
angles
total
angles rolled through
the
angles to port and starboard.
in other words, the
;
The
sum
of
oscillations
number of times the ship passes from Three starboard, and vice versa, per minute.
recorded are the port to
instruments are
measuring the
in
general
angles
of
clinometer, and the bar or last
alone
correct,
is
the French
and
is
use
roll
— the
tlie
horizon.
larger angles than the ship
she
Navy
pendulum,
batten instrument.
used in
all
for
the
The
the ships of
is
from the
roll,
We
should
even when a vessel
moderately, everything which
is
is
a very
usually indicating
moves through,
rolling heavily. fact that,
pendulum
Tlie
bad instrument for measuring the
this
om*
navy, the angle being determined by an
observation of
when
in
especially
anticipate is
roHiug
freely suspended on
.
1
Rolling of the Iron- Clads
44
board the
must
is
In order to illustrate
put into violent motion.
pendulum and the mistakes which
errors of the arise
from
C hap. V 1 1
.
employment,
its
I
need only turn to
On one occasion the Admiral Warden's Eeport. 'Lord Warden's' rolling amounted to ir4 degrees according to the pendulum, but only reached 9*1 instrument;
degrees according to the bar
another
trial
and
on
the indications of the two instruments
gave 14*9 and 12 degrees respectively as the angle of roll. These are, as we shall see, by no means the greatest differences which are recorded, but are given
The clinometer
as average specimens.
is
a somewhat
better instrument than the pendulum, but tions are not reliable, as
it
angle than the ship actually
its
indica-
also often gives a greater
I will not enter at
rolls.
greater length into this subject, but think that enough
has been said to bring
home
for careful observations
The
to the reader the necessity
with reliable instruments.
theoretical investigations
connected with the
subject of rolling are of too abstruse a character to be
introduced
this
into
Froude (who
The
chapter.
has within the
last
labours
of Mr.
few years taken
the lead in this matter), and of the other gentlemen
who have devoted
their attention to the subject, have,
however, resulted in the establishment of two great
which reader.
can scarcely
The
first
fail to
facts
be interesting to the general
of these foots
is
that the principal
thing (although not by any means the only one) which influences rolling,
is
the distance between the centre of
gravity of a ship and the point tects as the
'^
rolling at sea
known
metacentre " the second ;
is
largely influenced
to is
by the
naval archithat a ship's
period, &c., of
Iron-Clads.
Rolling of the
Chap. VII.
the waves she meets witli.
accuracy of
Experience confirms
As
botli these deductions.
need make no further remarks, since viously illustrated by reference to
Channel Squadron
145 tlie
to the latter it
lias l)een
the
we
pre-
of the
trials
but the former requires a brief
;
Ships which have a great distance between
notice.
the centre of gravity and the metacentre are technically
termed "
stiff,"
^iid will carry large spreads of canvas,
but they usually
roll
with violence.
On
the other
hand, ships which have a moderate distance between these points are not so if
distance
this
very
*'
stiff,
and roll moderately
;
while,
becomes very short, a ship will be
crank," and might possibly be upset under some
circumstances
—
for
example, by accumulated motion
sulting from the action of very long waves. to render this point clearer I will
cite
re-
In order
a few facts.
In the French squadron referred to above there were five iron-clads,
which stand
in the following order as
regards the distances between the centres of gravity
and the metacentres ronne,'
'
Invincible,'
—
'
and
Solferino,' '
has the least distance, and
'
Magenta,'
Normandie.' The
'
'
Cou-
Solferino
'
the steadiest ship, and the
is
others are reported to have stood precisely in the order in
which they are named as regards their rolhng.
own Navy
our
similar
For example, the 3 feet
and
is
'
have been obtained.
results
Achilles
'
has a distance of about
between the centre of gravity and the metacentre, a remarkably steady ship
;
whereas the
Consort,' with a distance of 6 feet, rolls
the that,
*
In
Achilles.'
It is
identical
in
'
Prince
much more thnn
even more interesting
although the 'Warrior' and
'
to
remark
Achilles' are nearly
external form, the former has a greater to
L
two points than the
distance between these
latter,
and
not nearly so steady.
is
These of
illustrations will serve to
show the
desirability
the distance between the centre of gravity
making
and the metacentre ''
Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
146
—
metacentric height "
— as
small as
is
consistent with
a proper amount of sail-carrying power, or
when
new
a
iron-clad
being designed
is
course has been followed in position of the metacentre
and dimensions of a and by the
is
;
stability,
and
this
The
recent ships.
determined by the form
is
ship, especially at the water-line,
total disj^lacement
centre of gravity
all
the
language,
technical
in
or,
fixed
;
and the position of the
by the stowage of the weights
on board, the disposition of the armour, and the mode
On
of constructing the hull. there
is
certain fixed dimensions
a greater scope for altering the position of the
moving
centre of gravity than for
the results of our experience as follows
;
—A high position
the metacentre, and
may
be broadly stated
of the centre of gravity
tends to produce steadiness, and a low position tends
The
to cause excessive rolling. princi23les
leads
to
the
recognition of these
explanation
of some
of the
apparently strange facts connected with the subject of rolling.
For
instance, wood-built
iron-clads
have
heavier hulls than those built of iron, and the weights of engines, boilers, &c., are placed low down,
all
of
which tends to bring down the centre of gravity, and as the result the wood-built ships roll
than the iron-built ships. differences
among
There
the iron
more heavily
are, of course, great
ships themselves, due
in
great measure to different positions of their centres of
gravity resulting from variations in the armour, arma-
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. VII.
147
ment, heights of engines and boilers, and stowage.
Take, for example, the two ships above referred '
Achilles
and
'
'
almost identical, but the
the
Their external forms are
Warrior.' *
to,
Achilles
throughout the length, which the
by which the centre of gravity
is
has an armour belt
'
'
"Warrior
has not,
'
brought higher up
;
she also has other weights above the water which the *
Warrior
than the
has not,
'
and her displacement
Warrior's,'
*
greater
is
which brings down the meta-
centre, so that the combined effect of these changes to
make
the
'
Achilles
is
the steadier ship of the two.
'
In recent ships, such as the
'
Bellerophon
'
and
'
Her-
cules,'
the position of the centre of gravity has been
raised,
by means of deep double bottoms and other
contrivances for carrying the great weights of engines,
high up as possible.
boilers, &c., as
The
of the
fallacy
popular belief that rolling
is
caused by carrying heavy weights on the upper works of iron-clads
rendered
is
still
more apparent by
which form a complete answer
facts,
made upon These
the
*
also to the attack
Invincible' class in our
vessels have, as before stated,
these
own Navy.
armoured upper-
deck batteries, the weight of which being carried at such a height above water has been said, not only
by unprofessional writers and speakers, but by professed
The
naval
architects,
probability,
to
be conducive to rolling.
amounting almost
certainty,
to
is,
however, that these upper-deck batteries alone would
make
the ships steadier, as they bring
of gravity
sail-power a
;
up the centre
although, on the other hand, the great
of
these
ships,
considerable amount
necessitating,
as
it
docs,
a
limit
of stability, has put [.
2
.
1
48
'
The good behaviour
improveineiit.
this
to
Chap. VI I
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
Magenta
'
and
Solferino
^
'
becomes inteUigible
also
remembered that their lofty sides, when it additional gun-deck, and the unusual height of
their
is
armour,
than
all
it is
the
of
their
tend to bring the centre of gravity higher
ordinary iron-clads.
in
In concluding these general remarks on rolling,
may
our recent ships prove that,
state that the trials of
on the whole,
this
important and
been successfully grappled with
most receut broadside
I
difficult
and the
;
the
frigate,
subject has
trials of
our
have
'Hercules,'
shown her to be all that could be desired as a steady gun platform. The Lord Clyde/ Royal Oak,' and Prince Consort,' do undoubtedly roll more than the but this, as we have already pointed iron-built ships '
^
*
;
out, is
due in a great measure
have wooden
hulls.
The
'
they
to the fact that
Lord Warden
the difference in behaviour being caused,
'
is
steadier,
most probably,
by her upper weights being somewhat greater than those of the Lord Clyde,' a fact which tends to raise the '
centre of gravity, and therefore to prevent rolling. I
now
propose to consider the results of actual
trials
of rolling, so far as the records given in the Reports
on our Channel Squadron will enable give a brief resume of these results.
me
to go,
and
to
Admiral Dacre's
18G4 shows that on the four days when all the ships were together, the means of the extreme rolls
Report
for
recorded *
were
Warrior'
and
as
follow
:
'Defence,'
—
10*25;
11*05; 'Prince Consort,' 11-75 line-of-battle
ship),
was measured by a
14*25.
Hector,'
*
;
10
'Black
degrees
;
Prince,'
and 'Edgar' (wooden
The
'
Wariior's' rolling
different instrument
from that used
— Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron- Clads,
on board the other compared with
This record
great interest, on account of
is,
however, of
comparison
tlie
it
renders
possible between the beliaviour of tlie iron-clads
the
wooden two-decker, the
49
cannot be fairly
ships, so that she
tliem.
1
and
proving the heaviest
latter
In Admiral Yelverton's Eeport
roller in the squadron.
for 1866, there are given examjoles of the comparative
rolling of several of the iron-clads, obtained
which the mean
days' observations^ of
'Achilles' and 'Bellerophon,'
'Ocean,' 14-3 are,
it
will be
' ;
Lord
6'
6 degrees
Clyde,' 16-1
results are ;
at both trials
was the
on the
first
'
:
'Hector,' 11*3;
'Pallas,' 17-3.
These
remembered, the sums of the angles of
The only
ing to port and to starboard.
steadiest
;
from three
roll-
ship present
Hector,' and she, from being
occasion, dropped into the third
was not much Hence it would naturally be inferred that the 'Achilles' and Bellerophon were steadier ships than any of those present in the 1864 squadron; and this place on the second, although her rolling greater.
'
'
inference has been
The
shown
to be correct
by further
trials.
three heaviest rollers are wood-built ships, a fact
which partly explains their behaviour. of the
'
The small
size
Pallas/ as compared with the other ships, puts
her at a great disadvantage
as
regards comparative
rolling in ordinary waves.
Admiral Warden's Eeport detailed in
its
for
1867
is
much more
records of rolling than either of the pre-
ceding Reports.
The performances of various
ships are
recorded separately, and there are, in addition, abstract returns giving the
mean
results of the rolling of all
ships tried on various occasions.
over portions of the months
The
trials
llie
extended
of August, Se})tember, and
;;
Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads,
150
my
October; and in
remarks upon the
for convenience, follow the
results I will,
arrangement adopted in the
On
Eeport, beginning with the returns for August.
the 12th of that month, records of the behaviour were
made, *
when
the
ships
four
Minotaur,'
'
'Achilles,'
Bellerophon,' and 'Lord Clyde,' were proceeding for
10 hours at a 5-knot speed under steam, the sea being
The
nearly smooth.
which
rolled at
'Achilles'
the
all,
From
3 degrees.
was the only ship and her maximum angle was only '
maximum
'
the 14th to the 17th of August, the
stated
is
Lord Clyde
have
to
On
are not mentioned.
very
rolled
angle being 4 degrees
slightly,
the other ships
;
20th, the squadron
the
was
somewhat heavy sea on the beam and bow, and the total mean rolls, measured Minotaur,' 4*8 degrees by the pendulum, were Bellerophon,' 6*8; 'Lord Clyde,' 'Achilles,' 5*8; 12*3. On the 21st the 'Achilles' is reported to have under
only, with a
sail
:
—
'
'
rolled very slightly, her
motion being scarcely per-
and the remaining ships are not mentioned but on the 23rd, the squadron being under steam in a moderate sea, the pendulum gave the following total ceptible,
mean
rolls
;
:
— 'Minotaur,'
and Achilles/ 4 '
' ;
Lord
'Bellerophon'
3*5 degrees;
Clyde,' 6*75.
It
may
appear
strange that I should select the pendulum observations
remarking on the errors incident to the use of
after
that instrument
;
the reason
instrument with which
The 'Lord
Clyde's'
this is
20th,
when
that this
the
ships
rolling was, no doubt,
made
to
was by these observations rendered certain by the fact that on the
appear greater than
and
all
was the onlywere supplied.
is
the
it
really
total
mean
roll
was
12*3 degrees
by
'
Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
151
the pendulum, that by the dinometer was only 10*4 degrees.
It is to
be regretted that the bar instrument
with which the 'Lord Clyde' was furnished was not used on this occasion, the **
main
''
way
tions
trj^sail
was hauled
of fixing this instrument
;
and in the
aft,
" for if the observa-
had been made, the true behaviour of the ship
would have been known. as
given being that
the reason
sheet
we have
port and to
starboard
little less
starboard a
roll includes,
before stated, both the angles of heel to
example, had a total port w^as a
mean
Tlie total
little
were not made
when
;
roll
the
*
Lord Clyde,'
for
of 12.3 degrees, her roll to
than half that amount, and that to
more than
half.
The
trials for
August
in severe weather, witli the exception of
that on the 20th, on which occasion the
Lord Clyde
'
could not have fought her main-deck guns for about three or four hours, although the other ships could have
fought
all their
guns throughout the day.
when
be forgotten, however, that, even
guns carried
heavily, the upper-deck
bow
battery
of the
fought, and would in
'
Lord Clyde
all
'
must not
It
rolling
in the
could
most
armoured
have been
probability have proved most
formidable under the circumstances.
Passing on to the September records, trials
we
find that the
were made during the passage of the squadron
from Portland to Berchaven.
and the
'
Bellerophon
'
Only the
'
are mentioned in
Lord Clyde tlie
abstract
returns for the 4th and two following days, but by taking
them
in coimection witli the detailed reports for tliose
days,
we make
rophon's
'
6 degrees
total
out the following facts:
mean
roll
for
the
— The
'
]>elie-
4th was about
by the pendulum, and the other
shi})s
did not
1
On
much.
roll so
5th, the ships encountered a
the
heavy sea in crossing the entrance
and the 'Minotaur' 13,
Chap. VI I.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
52
the
'
Bellerophon
The next day,
and the 'Lord Clyde'
15,
'
to the Irish Channel,
12 degrees, the 'Achilles'
rolled
19.
in very similar weather, the rolling,
on
the whole, resembled that of the 5th, although on one occasion the
rophon
and the
'
Minotaur
'
rolled 19 degrees, the
'
Belle-
20 degrees (16 to starboard, and 13 to port),
'
'
Lord Clyde
These two days'
23 to starboard, and 24i to port.
'
trials constituted
the severest tests of
the rolling qualities of the iron-clads in the squadron,
and
it
is
consequently of great interest to enquire as
to their fighting capabilities
Bellerophon
'
'
on these occasions.
The
could have fought her guns with perfect
on the 5th, although the captain states that " the " ports could not be kept permanently open." The
safety
reports do not state the capability of
guns on the
fight their
any of the
6th, except the
'
ships to
Lord Clyde,'
which could not have fought her main-deck guns, as the sea was washing entirely over the ports and this was also the case with this ship at intervals on the 5th. ;
I
need hardly again draw the reader's attention to the
upper-deck battery guns of this ship, which could, no doubt, have been fought with great effect and perfect safety,
although no information
is
given in the report
as to her capability, or otherwise, in this respect.
remarks are made as '
Minotaur
'
and
'
No
to the fighting capability of the
Achilles
were steadier than the
'
'
on the 5th
;
Bellerophon,' there
but as they is
no doubt
that they also could have fought their main-deck guns.
On
the whole, therefore, the results of these trials in
heavy weather are very
satisfactory.
—
'
Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
The October period,
1
53
extended over a much longer
trials
and the number of ships in the squadron was
On
larger.
the 9th the ships were under canvas, with
a long heavy sea on the beam, and the total
were moderate
for
the
all
ships
mean
rolls
'Lord
except the
The Minotaur rolled 6T degrees, according to the pendulum observations, but only 3*8 degrees by the Clyde.'
'
'
batten instrument, another illustration of the inaccuracy
No
of the pendulum.
made
record w^as
rophon's' performance.
of the
*
Belle-
All the other ships had bar or
batten instruments, the observations with which gave the following total
mean
rolls:
—
'Achilles,' 5*9 degrees;
'Lord Warden,' 9-1; 'Lord Clyde,'
'Warrior,' 7*5;
With the exception of the 'Lord Clyde,' the on this occasion was probably less heavy than that of wooden frigates would have been under similar circumstances. The Lord Clyde's behaviour was not so satisfactory, as she rolled from 21-5.
rolling of the ships
'
9 to
12 degrees each way, and
"when
states that,
" guns, with lower
the captain's report
at general quarters, although the
half-ports
up, might occasionally
" have been worked, they were practically useless, as " the sea
washed into the muzzles
" exposed." ^'
\\\
that could
remark
" none
be worked ;
"
directly they
the column headed "
with
number
we
safety,"
were
guns the
find
but this does not, of course, include
the protected upper-deck guns before referred
the next day, the
of
'
Lord Clyde'
On
to.
rolled quite as heavily,
but the other ships only rolled moderately, and could
have fought
mean '
rolls
all
main-deck guns.
their
Their
total
by the bar or batten instruments were
Achilles, 2*2 degrees
'
\
Minotaur,' 2*7
' ;
:
Bellerophon,'
3
Chap. vil.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
154 ' ;
Warrior,' 6-1
notice that the
'
;
Lord Warden,'
11-2.
It is
pendulum observations gave the
rophon' a total mean
8*2
of
roll
occasion, although her actual roll
'
worth Belle-
degrees on
was only
this
3 degrees.
During the next three days, the weather was much more moderate, and the Minotaur and Bellerophon '
'
'•
'
had no appreciable motion, while the rolled 1*4 degrees
on the 11th, and
3*2 degrees
much
the 4*9
:
*
;
'
Lord
was very
2*8
similar
;
and
degrees
On
Clyde,' 6*5.
this
only
on the
rolling motion,
as will appear from the following total
11th — Warrior,'
'
The remainder
13th, being nearly steady on the 12th.
of the squadron were also without
Achilles
'
mean
rolls
of
Lord Warden,'
'
;
the 12th, their behaviour
was
also the case with all
Lord Warden,' on the 13th. This vessel, as we have seen, was considerably steadier on all preceding trials than her sister ship, the Lord
the vessels, except the
^
'
Clyde
;'
but on this occasion, while the other ships were
comparatively steady, and the rolling
degrees. is,
degrees,
5' 5
Lord Clyde was only
'
'
the 'Lord
The explanation of
Warden'
this singular
rolled
doubtless, to be found in the character of the
among which
she was rolling, as
stances remained
all
12
behaviour
waves
other circum-
unchanged from the preceding day.
The squadron was under steam on long and heavy sea on the quarter.
14th, with a
the
The
considerable, but all the ships, except the
'
rolling
was
Lord Clyde,'
could have fought their main-deck guns, although the Warrior,' and
Lord Warden,' would have shipped some water through the ports in doing so. '
Bellerophon,'
The
'
ports of the
according
to
the
'
Lord Clyde
captain's
'
'
could be kept open,
report,
without shipping
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. VII.
water '-'
;
and yet
it
135
added, " none of her guns could
is
As
have been fought without great caution."
when
ships were shipping water
other
fighting their guns,
can only be explained by supposing that
this report
there were defects in the arrangements for controlling
and working the guns of the
mean
measured by
rolls,
were:
this trial
6-3;
'
Warden,' 14*5
9*4;
6*2
degrees; 'Achilles,'
Only two
21.
mentioned as having rolled on the 15th
which rolled
as
much
:
'Lord
12*6;
'Warrior,'
'Lord Clyde,'
;
total
bar or batten instruments, on
—'Minotaur,'
Bellerophon,'
The
Lord Clyde/
*
the
ships are Achilles,'
'
10 degrees, and the 'Lord
as
Clyde,' w^hich occasionally rolled deeply
;
both ships
have fought their guns.
could, however,
The concluding series of
recorded in this Report
trials
were commenced on the 25th of October, the 'Prince Consort,' Eoyal Oak,' and Pallas,' having joined the '
'
No
squadron.
from the
abstract return
detailed
reports
given for this day, but
is
appears
it
maximum
moderate breeze and a very long swell, the roll of
the
pendulum was about
;
'
Achilles
'
was about
and that the average 7
degrees, of the
'
with a
that,
6 degrees,
roll of
the
'
by the
Warrior
Prince Consort
'
about
'
9 degrees,
and of the 'Royal Oak' about 10 degrees.
The next
day's records only give
respect to four
were
:
—
'
Oak,' 10
ships,
of which the total
Achilles,' 2*5 degrees ;
and
'
information
;
Prince Consort
mean
Warrior,' 5*7
'
'
w^itli
' ;
rolls
Royal
(by pendulum), 10*4.
was the only ship which did not carry a batten instrument, and her rolHng was no doubt exaggerated by tlie pendulum observations. During the 27th and 28tli the rolhng was so slight
The
'
Prince Consort
'
'
Chap. VI I.
Rolling of the Iron- Clads,
156
no notice; but on the 29th, in a heavy steam, some of the ships rolled conunder and sea, Taking the observations with the batten siderably.
as to require
instruments in
the ships except the
all
for wliich vessel the
means
'
Prince Consort,'
pendulum and
of the
meter observations are taken, we find the rolls to *
have been as follow 5*9;
Achilles,'
Oak'
'Royal
^
:
— 'Minotaur,'
Warden' and
8-6;
Bellerophon,'
and 'Prince
clino-
mean
total
3*1 degrees;
'Warrior,'
Consort,'
ll'l
;
12; 'Lord Clyde,' 27-4.
'Pallas,'
9;
'Lord All
except the last-named ship could fight their main-deck
guns
;
and
in the captain's report for the
day we find
" placed to have fought all
"might have been her guns by bringing her
The
records conclude with the
it
^'
head
trials
the 'Lord Clyde'
that
stated
to the swell."
when
of the 30th of October,
the sea was moderate,
and the ships were under steam. The Minotaur and Bellerophon had no appreciable motion; the 'Achilles' only rolled 2*6 degrees; and the total mean '
'
'
rolls for the
ment
other ships were given by the batten instru-
as follow
Oak,' 5-3
' ;
:
— Lord Warden,' 4*7
Prince Consort,' 5*7
Clyde' and 'Pallas,' fought their main-deck
From '
these
Minotaur
'
degrees
'
Warrior,' 6*3
' ;
guns on
it
and Achilles were the '
in the squadron, the former
is
to
steadiest ships
having a slight advantage,
the comparative smallness of the is
then
her greater size and weight.
steadier than the
lation to these ships
Lord
appears that the
These two vessels are rather superior phon,' wdiich
'
;
this occasion.
records of rolling
which was probably due
Royal
All the ships could have
13.
'
' ;
'
'
to tlie
'
Bellero-
When
Warrior.'
Bellerophon
'
in re-
taken into account, the high
a
Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron- Clads.
:>/
position she occupies as regards freedom from rolling
cannot
is
Clyde's
ship to the
she
inferior to the
little
behaviour
'
may
'
is
'
The 'Lord
Warrior.'
singularly bad, but as she
Lord Warden,' there can be
much
be rendered
previously
more than the iron tlie 'Lord Warden,'
roll
although the best of them,
but very
As
remarkaljle.
wood-built ships
stated, tlie
ships,
appear
to
fail
steadier
little
a sister
is
doubt that
by raising some of
the weights, or by some otlier equivalent means fact, there
is
no a priori reason why she should not be
equally steady with the
Lord Warden
'
built iron-clads
'
the weiglits
if
The remaining wood-
carried were similarly arranged.
were only present
at a
few
weather except on the 29th October. however, the
Oak appear '
Warden,' and the
'
Pallas
again
call
trials
all
Clj^de,'
sions,
'
Pallas
behaved
'
are
to
'
heavy
to
far as these
'
and
'
as the
Royal '
Lord
be hardly as steady
at
when
taken
into
wondered
As
Prince Consort
to be nearly as well
result not to be
of the
'
and
trials,
were not tested by anything approaching trials go,
— in
—
the small dimensions account.
would
I
attention to the fact that throughout these
the ships, with the exception of the
could have fought
all
tlieir
guns on
'
all
Lord occa-
although they would sometimes have shipped
water through the ports.
The Report on the
trials of the Chainiel Fleet in
ISGS
also contains detailed returns of the rolling of several of
the iron-clads during the cruise
4th June to
(>th
July.
1
which extrndcd from
do not propose
to
go
seriatim
througli these returns, as the weather
was on nearly
occasions exceptionally fine, and
simply
sliall
state,
all
with
respect to most of the returns, that the figures given as
;
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
158
made show that the 'Mino-
the result of the observations
and
taur/ 'Achilles,' ships
;
that the
other
the
that
*
Bellerophon/ are the steadiest
Warrior
*
Chap, vi i.
'
is
a
little less
ships, particularly the
'
steady
and
;
Eoyal Oak,'
are not nearly so steady, although they behave quite
would probably behave was Hercules The under similar circumstances. There were, however, a few days not present. unarmoured
as well as
frigates
'
'
on which the behaviour of some ships was such as to deserve notice, and I shall briefly refer to those cases.
On
the 8th of June,
when
the ships were under plain
with a moderate sea on the beam and quarter,
sail,
the force of
wind being 4
lerophon,'
Achilles,'
'
moving, their
when
the
*
total
to 6, the
and
mean
'
roll
'
Minotaur,'
Warrior,'
'
Bel-
were scarcely
not exceeding 24 degrees,
Defence's' roll was 8*8 degrees, the 'Royal degrees, and the
Oak's' was 9*5 10*3 degrees.
Even
the
maximum
'Prince Consort's' roll
was, of course, very moderate, and
have been fought in
all
the ships
;
all
on
this occasion
the guns could
but the figures given
are interesting as the
means of comparing the behaviour
of the different ships.
On the
rolls *
recorded to be as
Achilles,'
7-7;
5*2;
'
we find the
:
'
total
mean
4*3 degrees
Bellerophon,' 5*4; 'Prince Consort,'
'Warrior,' 9*3;
The
10th
follow — Minotaur,'
'Defence,'
11-2; 'Royal
Oak,'
was " moderate and long on beam," and the force of wind All the ships rolled more 3, or less than on the 8th. 14*3.
on
ships
this occasion
Consort,'
were under plain
sail,
the sea
than on the 8th, except the
which had a
total
mean
roll
'
Prince
2i degrees
less.
This circumstance can only be explained by the different
Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads,
159
character of the waves on the two days, as the ship's
lading remained almost unaltered of the varying
illustration
upon a
it
affords another
which waves have
effect
The
ship's behaviour.
and
;
Royal Oak,' although
^
guns through-
rolling considerably, could figlit all her
One other
out the day.
day deserves attention,
mean
roll
feature of the returns for this
viz. the fact that,
while the total
of the 'Minotaur' was 8*2 degrees accord-
ing to the pendulum,
it
was only
4*3 degrees according
to the correct observations of the batten instrument. It is
no wonder, therefore, that Captain Goodenough
states in his report that
he considers the pendulum
observations to be "
more than useless," and that he recommends the exclusive use of the batten instrument. On the 11th w^e find that the Royal Oak and Prince Consort' w^ere roUing more heavily than on the ^xq'
'
vious day, while
the other ships were steadier, the
all
squadron being under steam. parts of this
day the
'
'
In
fact,
during some
Royal Oak could not have fought '
her main-deck guns with safety, although the captain
remarks
in his report
—" In a
case of emergency,
" watching the rolls, the guns on " be used."
The
*
\\\(d
Prince Consort
than the 'Royal Oak,' her total
all
was much
mean
degrees, while the 'Royal Oak's'
could fight
'
and by
highest side
was
steadier
being 11*1
roll
10*2,
her guns throughout the day
may
and she
but during
;
a few hours about midday she rolled occasionally so
deeply as to render
it
probable that water would have
been shipped at the ports in fighting the guns.
Tlie only
explanation that can be offered of the fact that these two ships rolled so heavily on a day
when most
of the other
ships were conij^aratively steady must be found in the
'
1
60
which the
relative influence
The
their rolling.
more
we
any other
than
state of the sea
case of the
especially interesting, as
Warrior,'
and
Defence,'
'
'
v
i i
.
had upon
Prince Consort
'
is
find her on the 8th rolling
ship
in
the 10th, in rougher weather, *
Chap,
Rolling of the Iron- Clads,
'
the
squadron
;
on
rolling less than the
Koyal Oak
'
and on the
;
11th, when there was no wind, and the squadron was
under steam, again rolling more than any the
Oak
Royal Oak.'
'
Throughout the
except
shi23
cruise the
*
Royal
continued to be^ except on a few occasions, the
'
among the large ships in the squadron, only times when she could not fight her guns
heaviest roller
but the
were xhe few hours on the 11th, previously referred to, and from 5 to 6 o'clock on the morning of the 12th, when she was rolling 10 degrees to starboard and 11
On
degrees to port.
the latter occasion the captain's
report states that the guns might have been fought
during the interval of the
No
roll.
remarks are necessary respecting the returns of
rolling from the 12th to the '
Pallas
fine
'
the
'
Minotaur
tically still (their
degree), the
'
of the '
Defence
mean
the
'
total roll '
On the
Bellerophon
'
was
21st of June, '
were prac-
being nine-tenths of a
rolling 1*4 degrees, the
the 'Prince Consort' 3*1, while the
Royal
'
and
'
Warrior
'Achilles' 2-1, roll
when
joined the squadron, as the weather was very
and the rolling very moderate.
when
the
19 th of June,
Oak
'
9*4 degrees,
was
7*7 degrees,
and that of the
that '
of
Pallas
13*4 degrees. Although the 'Pallas' was rolling more than the other ships, she could fight all her guns and keep all her ports open. On the 22nd and 23rd the only ships whose total mean roll exceeded 6 degrees
1;
Chap. VI I.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
were the
'
Royal Oak
heavily as
rolled
and
'
'
On
mainder of
compared with the
by
rolling
the
Pallas
ships,
guns through-
than
tlie
ships,
otlier
mean
she had a total
which had the next
sliip
Royal Oak,' only rolled 5*3 degrees. must be remembered, liowever, that the Pallas is roll,
the
'
'
much
smaller than any of
ships,
tlie otlier
'
and
although she sometimes rolled more heavily,
guns could be fought on
The returns much light on in
re-
tlie
distinguished herself
'
when
16 degrees, while the
greatest It
'
considerably more
particularly on the 28th, roll of
all their
other
one or two occasions during
tlie cruise,
6
both of which
Pallas,'
although they were able to fight out the day.
1
for
that,
all
her
all occasions.
1868 do not, as
I
have
said,
throw
the probable behaviour of our iron-clads
heavy weather
at sea, but as all the ships except the
'Defence' had been present in the 1867 squadron, this is
The
the less to be regretted.
learn
is,
little
which we can
however, confirmatory of the conclusions drawn
from the former
trials,
our iron-clads do not
and tends
to
show, not only that
roll excessively,
most
but that
Trials at sea have of them are comparatively steady. shown that our last large broadside ship, the 'Hercules,' is
probably the steadiest of
all
the ir(^n-clads
certainly she ranks with the very best of them.
The whole and
its
subject of i-oUing, in both
practical aspects,
is
still
from the nature of the iurpiiiy to exact results.
much
to clear
the causes
of,
it
its
theoretical
very unsettled
;
and
can hardly be brought
Theoretical investigations have done
away misapprehensions with and remedies
respect to
for excessive rolling,
have brought out the two great
facts
and
above-mentioned
M
1
Chap. VII.
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
62
—the
effects of the
metacentric height and of the
period upon a ship's rolling in a sea-way.
wave
Practical
ohservations and experiments have also been of great service, despite their inaccuracy
and incompleteness, and
have proved that theoretical conclusions agree very What is wanted in closely with actual performance. order to advance our knowledge of the subject further
still
a series of carefully conducted trials with
is
ships of different types, under varied circumstances of
wind and weather, the observations being made and the results recorded in a more reliable manner than heretofore.
marks, as I
I
would not be misunderstood in these reto throw discredit upon the
have no intention
In
reports which appear in the Parliamentary Papers. fact, as little
far as the
Admiralty regulations go, there
or nothing left to be desired in the
ducting the
trials
of rolling
;
many
mode of conwho goes
but any one
carefully over the records cannot in
is
fail
to
remark that
respects they are very imperfect.
already referred to the fact that in
many
We
have
cases
the
by different instruand have shown this to be Of late this fault has been
angles of rolling were measured
ments in
different ships,
a fruitful source of error.
remedied by using the bar or batten instruments in or nearly
all,
all,
our ships, and by this means checking
pendulum and clinometer observations. When uniformity in the method of conducting the trials and recording the results has become more general, we shall obtain more valuable and reliable information with respect to rolling than we now possess, and may hope to advance correspondingly in the improvement The most valuable aid to this end of our iron-clads. the errors of the
Rolling of the Iron-Clads.
Chap. VII.
163
must, however, be derived from the advanced scientific
attainments of our naval
by
officers
officers, as
who have mastered
and are cognisant of the ment, cannot
fail
to
the trials conducted
the theory of rollings
special points requiring settle-
be
more valuable than
tliose
carried out in a spirit of blind obedience to regulations,
without any regard
underlying principles.
to,
or
knowledge
of,
the
—
—
.
•
DiinensioJis
164
Chap. VI 1 1.
of tJie Iron-Clads,
CHAPTER
YIII.
DIMEXSIOXS OF THE IRO^-CLADS.
Beferexce has already been made
to the differences in
dimensions and proportions existing I
clads.
now
among our
iron-
propose to enquire at greater length into
those differences, and to describe in as popular language as possible the principles
which have been developed
may I
in
In order that the reader
the designs of various ships.
readily grasp the facts connected with this subject,
have arranged them in the following
gives the lengths,
table,
which
and proportions of the
breadths,
longest and finest of our wooden vessels, as well as those of our most important iron-clads Length.
Ships.
Wood
ships
:
—
Longest three-decked Ime-of-battle two-decked „ „ fi'igates „ Iron-clads
shij)s
»
.
••
:
Warrior class Minotaur „ Defence and Resistance Hector and Valiant Caledonia class (converted ships)
Lord Clyde and Lord Warden Bellerophon Pallas Favorite Prince Albert (turret-ship)
Hercules Penelope
"^^^^^^^ Invincible class
Thunderer class (turret-ships) Rupert (ram)
(
:
Breadth.
V III.
Chap.
On
Dimensions of the Iron- CIads.
1
looking through this table, the reader cannot
with the increase in
to be struck
size
in our earliest iron-clad frigate, tlie
'
65
fail
and proportions
Warrior,' as com-
pared with the longest and finest ships which preceded
The length is 80 feet greater than that of the longest wooden frigates, and the displacement of more her.
9100 tons
than
is
3000 tons greater than that of
wooden two -decked changes were considered desirable our
largest
ships.
These great
in consequence of the
adoption of armour-plating over about 213 feet of the amidshijD part of the broadside.
The
objects kept in
view in the design were the carrying of a considerable weight of armour on a long
fine ship, of
which the
form was suited ta a high speed relatively to the enginepower.
known
It is well
satisfactorily attained, the
that these objects were most
high estimated speed having
been secured with a moderate proportional expenditure of power.
The
system of protection being considered
partial
objectionable^
'Minotaur' intention
the
for
class
was
to
reasons previously stated,
was designed.
the
In these ships the
combine complete protection with a
proportional economy of steam-power similar to that
obtained in the
given in the 10,200 tons, order to
'
The very
Warrior.'
tal)le,
large dimensions
and the load displacement of over
were then considered the
fulfil
least possible in
the conditions laid down, and to enable
the requisite weights of equipment to be carried. this case also the
on
trial,
but,
In
high estimated speed has been obtained
owing
to their great length, these vessels,
even more than those of the
'
found unhandy and wanting
Warrior
'
class,
in niaiia3u\'ring
have been [)()\vei',
a
1
Dimensions of the Iron-Clads.
66
feature of
tlie
Chap. viil.
utmost importance in war ships.
Without
for the present entering into the discussion of the rela-
tive merits of long
iron-clads, which will be con-
and short
sidered at length in the following chapter, cient to state that in
two
classes of ships
my
were
it
will be suffi-
opinion the designs of these
in error in this respect
— that,
amount of engine-power, very long, large, costly, and unhandy ships were constructed. In war ships it is no merit to have in order to save a comparatively small
a large proportion of weights carried to steam-power developed,
if
that proportion
obtained by means of
is
and an armoured ship should rather carry a large weight of armour and guns upon a short, cheap, and handy hull, a good speed being obexcessive length and size
;
tained by an increase in the steam-power.
In the designs of the
*
Defence
and
'
which were prepared soon after the dimensions and proportions were
'
'
Eesistance,'
Warrior's,' the
much more mode-
These and the estimated speeds were lower. ships are only 280 feet long^ and the proportion of length to breadth exceeds 5 to I but the Hector and
rate,
'
:
'
Yaliant,' of the
'
same length, are
have a proportion of about 5 to tions
having been made
*
little
Caledonia'
room
for
class,
I,
these
and
modifica-
in consequence of the different
disposition of the armour.
the
2 feet broader,
In the converted ships of
there was, of course, comparatively
change from the original designs pre-
pared for two-decked ships of the increased by about 20
feet,
line.
The length was
and the breadth remained
almost unchanged, their dimensions,
when
converted,
long by 58 J feet broad, and the proportion of length to breadth being nearly the same as in the
being 273
feet
C HAP. V 1
1 1
Dimensions of the
.
finest two-deckers. *
Gloire
the
'
'
class,
ships of the
Navy.
with
that these moderate proportions
have been retained in nearly rial
67
but are about 18 feet shorter, and
know
of interest to
it is
The French converted
1
class are nearly identical in proportions
Caledonia
'
Iro7i- CIads.
all
the ships of the Impe-
In some ships the proportion of length to
breadth has been raised to 5 to floating batteries
ought hardly
it is
as
low as 2^
to be classed
Having sketched
1,
and to
few of the
in a
1,
but the latter
with ships.
the particulars of the dimensions
and proportions of the
earlier iron-clads,
it
becomes
necessary to refer to the adoption of more moderate pro-
and other recent ships. The opinions entertained by me on this much contro-
portions in the
'
Bellerophon
'
verted subject of long and short ships have been repeatedly stated in public, and for the present I shall deal only
with the results of the these
shij^s,
trials
and experiences made with
new method
observing that the
of design
is
based upon the considerations that a war ship should be handy, and therefore of moderate length
;
and that
the high speeds thought desirable can be obtained witli fuller lines
and a shorter
the engine-power.
and the reduction
The
ship,
by adding somewhat
to
increased manoBuvring power,
in prime cost, resulting from the adop-
tion of moderate proportions,
more than make amends
for this small addition to the steam-power.
This *
new method
received
its first illustration in
the
Bellerophon,' and has undergone in that vessel a series
of
trials,
most
the results of which are, on the whole, of n
satisfactory character.
In order to enable
the
reader to judge for himself on this point, the following tabular statements are given, which also afford the
means
— Dimensions of the Iron-Clads.
i68
Chap. VI 1 1,
of comparing the offensive and defensive powers of this vessel with those of longer ships.
may, however,
It
be proper to state beforehand that
tlie
Bellerophon/
'
having a central and a bow battery on the main deck,
and being protected throughout the length at the waterline, is so much superior offensively and defensively *
cannot be satisfactorily compared witli the
she
that
Warrior or '
amidships.
rophon
'
'
Black Prince,' which are only protected
worthy of remark that the
Still it is
compares with the
the measured-mile
steam performance
trials
'
Black Prince
'
being taken as the indices of
the
excess
weight
in
thicker backing adopted in the longer ships
stronger
is
fully counterbalanced
skin-plating,
behind armour,
and
fitted in the
the '
longitudinal
Bellerophon
of
armament
'
359 tons 1089 „ 6 inches
armour
„
Thickness of armour Eesistiug strength of armour, estimated as square of the thickness
the"!
36
not
girders
:
Black Prince.
340 tons 975 „ 4 J inches
/
£364,327
Cost
the
is
20
14-17 knots 6521
Speed .. Horse-power (indicated)
of
by the much
Bellerophon.
Weight
Belie-
as follows,
observing that in this and the
;
following comparison
regarded, as this
'
(to
13-604* knots )772
£378,310
which add a
percentage for
dockyard charges)
The advantage thus
lies
with the
'
Bellerophon
'
in
every point of the comparison, excepting perhaps the cost
*
(when swelled by the dockyard charges), and the
and the following Table on page 172 I have given the maxiiniini Black Prince at load draught in the first seven years bj'- the of her existence, as the 14-knot trial of 1868 came after the bulk of this chapter was written, and is irreconcilable with all her former trials. 111
this
speed attained
'
'
—
— Dimensions of the Iron-Clads,
Chap. VIII.
In addition, she possesses extreme handi-
engine-power.
ness as compared with the
'
Black Prince,' which would
be anticipated from the fact that she It
may
Prince '
is
'
Warrior
ciple.
If,
performance to her
inferior in
but while this
;'
however, the
Bellerophon
had
'
and armament
'
it
objection '
less
would
were taken
'
a fact
as the
appear that the
still
armour
The 'Warrior's'
inferior in speed.
little
as
is,
This point will
Bellerophon
no
true, it is
Warrior
we
made above
wath the
'
should expect, consider-
be examined further on
discussing the results of recent
The
Black
sister ship, the
the advantage as respects
indicated horse-power less.
is
'
— and, of course, as respects handiness
while only very
'
feet shorter.
embodiments of the same prin-
'are
representative long ship,
ably
80
is
be objected to this comparison that the
that both vessels
'
169
in
trials.
to the
comparison of the
Black Prince
'
on account of
their different systems of protection does not apply to
the comparison of the as both vessels
Bellerophon with the 'Achilles,' '
have a central battery and a water-line
The following
belt.
'
contrast between the
table will give a
two
ships
good idea of the
:
Achilks.
Weight
of
297 tons 1200 „ 4^ inches 20 1 4*3okuots 5722
armament
armour „ Thickness of armour Kesistiug strength of armoiu', estimated as before
Speed Horsc-powiT (indicated)
£470,330
Cost (net)
The
'
Achilles,'
it
must be reiuumbercd,
dimensions and proportions as the feet lonu'er
'
is
of
tlie
same
Warrior,' being SO
and of more than 2000 tons
greater dis-
;
Chap. viii.
Dimensio7is of the Iron-Clads.
170
placement than the carrying thicker
'
Bellerophon
;'
yet
we
find the latter
armour and a greater weight of arma-
ment than the Achilles.' The total weight of armour carried by the Achilles is, it is true, greater than that carried by the Bellerophon,' but in the larger vessel it '
'
'
'
is
spread over a very long hull, and
therefore only
is
4i inches thick in the thickest part, whereas the
phon
'
'
Bellero-
The Achilles has
carries 6-inch plating.
*
'
a small
advantage as respects speed and indicated horse-power this slight superiority
the
money value
is
represented by 106,000/.
ference between the
which the
being purchased at a cost of which
first cost
real value
—the
of the two ships
dif-
— and of
cannot be estimated without also
taking into account their relative powers of offence and defence.
The
latter
from the foregoing
may,
table,
to
some extent, be understood
but this must be supplemented
The
by the superior handiness of the shorter ship. difference of indicated power, amounting, as
it
does, to
only 800 H.-P., really represents about 120 H.-P. nominal of the
new type
of marine engine.
This fact
is
worth notice, as the additional cost for engines of this increased power would not exceed 8000/. or 0000/., and this still leaves a
very large margin (a2)proaching one
hundred thousand pounds) between the
two
ships. It
first costs
involved in maintaining the additional fuel,
&c.
tend to
—during the period of the still
of the
may, however, be thought that the expense
further decrease
against the shorter ship. case will be evident
That
when
it
power— extra
ship's service,
would
this
margin, and
this
would not be the
is
tell
observed that every
means has been taken in the new type of engines to and that the experience gained on economise fuel ;
Dimensions of the Iroji-Clads,
Chap, VIII.
aim has been most
actual service goes to prove that this satisfactorily attained.
171
be obvious that the
It will also
longer ship would require a larger number of the crew
and that consequently the
;
total cost of
On
taining her will be considerably greater. then,
may
it
be fairly concluded that
been most improper to have made the long and as large as the
'
men
Achilles
'
'
in
main-
the whole,
w^ould have
it
Bellerophon
'
as
in order to save
a small amount of power, and thus to have sacrificed
the other and very important advantages enumerated above.
In the succeeding chapter
on
shall therefore pass
now
again have to
shall
I
made with
refer to steam-trials
the
'
to notice
Bellerophon,' and
some of the other
iron-clads, constructed since that vessel, in
which similar
moderate dimensions have been adopted.
have been tried
ships
these
obtained
have been equally
obtained with the
and her
among
at
'
sea,
The
*
*
Lord Clyde
construction.
Lord Warden,' are included
advantages of the new system of
They are 280
feet long,
about 59 feet broad,
and have a load displacement of about 7700 proportion of length to breadth
than 42 to 1,
63 to
in the 1.
1, wdiile '
I'lie
batteries
and 5i inches
1,
and
sides of these short
and there are and there
is
little
it is
in the
'
Tlie
more
about
5.\
Minotaur'
broad ships are comin addition powerful
on the upper deck. thick,
tons.
thus very
is
in the 'Bellerophon'
Warrior' G^ to
pletely protected,
bow
'
those vessels, and are perhaps the most striking
illustrations of the
to
results
with those
satisfactory
Bellerophon.'
sister ship, the
Several of
and the
The armour
is
4^
besides an inner skin
of 1^-inch iron between the outside planking and the
—
.
Chap. VI 1 1.
Dimensions of the Iron-Clads,
172
timbers of the frame, extending entirely around battery for a depth of 10
feet.
The armament
very heavy, and the speed realised under steam 13 J knots. vessels,
The reader
is
also
about
will gain a better idea of these
however, from a comparison of some of their
more important
'
Warrior
Lord Clyde and the
'
'
tatives of the
two
with
particulars
particulars of the '
is
tlie
'
corresponding
the I
class.
have taken the
Black Prince as the represen'
classes in the following
comparison
Lord Clyde.
280 feet, 376 tons. 1379 „ 13-43 knots C064
Length Weight of armament armour „ Speed Horse power (indicated) .
(to
Black Prince.
380 feet 340 tons 975 „ 13-604 knots 5772
£378,310
£294,481
Cost
:
which add a per-
centage for dockyard charges)
In speed and indicated horse-power, the Black Prince,' '
it
advantage
will be seen, has a very slight
but the
;
some advantage as regards armament, advantage as regards armour, cost, and immense and an short ship has
handiness.
With
these
facts
before
him,
cannot
I
imagine any one maintaining that the proper course to
have adopted in designing the Lord Clyde would have been to make her 100 feet longer than she is, to '
'
take
away more than
one-fonrth of her armour and part
of her gnns, to deprive her of all
from protected guns,
to
bow and
stern fire
leave almost half her length
wholly unprotected, and to sj)end at least 50,000/. more
upon
her,
in order to
make her performance under
steam quite equal with the same power
to that of the
longer ship.
Other examples might be given of the favourable
'
Dhnensions of tJic Iron-Clads.
Chap. VIII.
The Lord Warden
with short ships.
results obtained
has been as successful as the
173
'
Lord
'
Clyde,'
and the
Pallas' (225 feet long and 50 feet broad) has realised
*
With
over 13 knots.
these facts before him, the reader
will not, I think, be surprised to find that the
*
Hercules,'
although she has about L300 tons' greater displacement than the
^
Bellerophon,' has very nearly the same pro-
portion of length to breadth Penelope,' and the
*
'
;
and that in the
Invincible
'
Monarch,'
class, similar moderate
'
proportions and dimensions have been retained.
The
^
Hercules
'
the last ship tried, and
is
total
but
on a displace-
just, in conclusion, to state that in her,
ment
it is
of about 8700 tons and a length of 325 feet, a
weight of armour of 1481 tons
nesses employed being
9, 8,
and
is
carried, tlie thick-
6 inches.
The Black *
Prince' carries 975 tons of 4i-inch armour, on a length of 380 feet and a displacement of about 9250 tons. '
Black Prince
while the
'
'
The
has only the amidship part protected,
Hercules
'
has an armour belt throughout
her length, rising to the height of a lofty main-deck
;
in addition to central, bow, and stern batteries, in which
Add
the guns are efficiently protected. that the shorter
and smaller ship
greater weight of
carries about
armament than the
and can command an all-round
to this the facts
fire
'
140 tons
Black Prince,'
from guns sheltered
behind armour, while the battery guns of the long
shij)
only liave the ordinary broadside training (about 30 degrees each way), and some idea will be gained of the
advances that have been made in the powers of offence
and defence of our iron-clads simultaneously with the reduction of their proportions and dimensions from those first
adopted.
The
s])ced attained
by
this vessel (the
— Dimensions of the Iron-Clads.
174
'Hercules') on her load-draught
trial
(14*69 knots)
greater than any other iron-clad (except the
has realised at load draught
;
Chap. vill.
is
Monarch ')
'
the engine-power required
to drive her at that speed was, of course, very large ; but I
have always held the opinion that the additional power required on account of her moderate proportions was
much more than compensated
by the saving in first cost and the superior handiness which result, and I provided for such additional power in the original design.
As
I shall
to the
for
have occasion hereafter to refer at some length
comparative performance under steam of this ship,
and of a design of longer and
finer
form which, except in
handiness, would be her equal as an engine of war, I shall not discuss the subject further here. It
may
be thought by some persons that in the pre-
ceding remarks too high a value has been put upon handiness in iron-clad war-ships, but that this
is
not the
opinion of experienced seamen will appear from the
following extracts from Reports of trials of ships com-
posing the
Channel Fleet.
Admiral Dacres observes " fleet
is
:
In his Report for 1864, "
As
only equal to that of
its
the speed of a steam
slowest ships so the
" recent evolutions with ships of such different length "
and form have gone
show that the rapid must be regulated by its longest the diameter of the circles described by the far to
" manoeuvring of a fleet
" ships, for "
*
Black Prince
'
and
'
Warrior,' being, say, 1000 yards
" at moderate speed, a fleet of which they form j)art
" must
move
in circles with
a radius of 500 yards,
" instead of about 250, which could be done
by
vessels
" of the length and steering as readily under steam as " the Hector but to convince of the unhandiness of '
:
'
— Chap. VIII.
'•''
''
"
these
Dimensions of the Iron-Clads.
from
vessels
length with the present
tlieir
means in our power of steering ships, I need only add that, where other vessels require only to be two cables
" apart, the
Warrior
'
" kept four cables." ''
175
and
'
*
Black Prince
In another paragraph he says
The great drawback
" class of vessel (the
many
to the
Warrior')
^
In
points."
wrote as follows of the
is
that their extreme
dimensions as the " qualities, the
'
" difficult to handle " especially if
" ruin.
...
Warrior
Achilles
*
186G,
many most
;
'
is,
and
feel
'
:
is
— " With
of the same
all
her good
from her great length, most
more might be her
this defect in action,
engaged with a
I
Admiral Yelverton
Achilles/ which
'
turi^et-ship,
and
certain that this ship might,
" probably would, have
:
excellencies of this
" length interferes with their handiness in
" important
must be
'
go out of action
to
to
turn
" round, thus exposing herself, in almost a defenceless
" position, to the fire of
more than one of the enemy's
" ships." In concluding his Eeport, he *'
result of this cruise I feel
" place to the
*
Achilles.'
" that her great length
I
bound
added
:
—
"
As the
award the
to
first
am, however, of opinion
an insurmountable objection,
is
" and have no hesitation in saying that ships of the "
'
Bellerophon
'
class,
from their
" diness, particularly
" efficient and valuable for
In the Reports of the 1868, Admiral
Warden
" the readiest
and most
of
all
size
war purposes."
trials of the
says that " the
in
Channel Fleet in '
Bellerophon
easily handled
the ships in the squadron.
marks— " There can
and general han-
under steam, will prove more
my
'
is
under steam
Admiral Iiyder
"
re-
opinion be no doubt that, as
" a general rule, the short class has
and must have
tlie
'
Chap, vi 11.
Dimensions of the Iron-Clads,
76
" advantage, as regards general handiness inider steam ,
" alone, over
tlie
long class," and in nearly the same
words speaks of the comparative handiness of the two under
classes sail
enough.
sail
alone, provided the short class
The same opinion
is
have
expressed in most of
the Reports of the captains of the different ships, Captain
Groodenongh, of the
Minotaur,' in a tabular form of the
'
merits of the various vessels, giving the
more than twice " manoeuvre
" as
many marks
as
Bellerophon
" handiness for
he gives to any of the long ships, and
Captain Yansittart, of the ''
for
'
^
Achilles,' stating that " there
cannot be a doubt the shorter
sliips
are handier under
" steam, sails furled^ than their longer companions."
In
these Reports also the question of handiness in connection with the
charge,
tained
is is,
power of ramming^ or avoiding an enemy's
considered, and the general opinion enteras
" class must,
it,
that " the short
ships,
have the advan-
Admiral Ryder puts amongst broadside
''
tage over the long class for giving effect to ramming,
"
and
"
rammed."
also,
but to a
The
less extent, for
latter
feature
escaping from being obviously
great importance, since there can be that in future naval actions
much
will
little
possesses
doubt but
depend upon
it,
and the experience of Lissa proves that quickness of turning
is
absolutely essential in order that a ship
avoid being rammed.
I shall revert
to
this
may
subject
hereafter.
With
these high estimates of the value of handiness
before him, the reader will feel a greater interest in the
following facts as to the relative turning powers of our
long and short iron-clads. of ships of the
Navy
it is
On
the measured-mile trials
usual to perform a complete
.
Chap. VIII.
circle
and
under
Di77ie7isions
full
of the Iron-Clads.
77
steam-power with the helm hard over,
to record the
diameter of the circle traversed as
well as the time occupied in turning.
As
these trials
by experienced stafts of naval and proand under very similar circumstances, the best means which are accessible of
are conducted
fessional officers,
they afford
testing a ship's manoeuvring powers. table I
have given the
as to their comparative handiness.
Time.
Warrior
.
Achilles
..
BcUeroplion
Lord Warden Lord Clvde
tiie
following
results of these trials for a
ships, in order to enable the reader to
]\Iinotaur..
In
judge
few
for himself
— Dhnensions of the Iron-Clads.
178
Chap. vili.
rudder has the special advantage of requiring only a
moderate force
Bellerophon
'
it
over to a considerable angle
on the measured-mile
for exam]3le,
the
put
to
'
degrees, whereas the
Minotaur' required 18
*
more
the wheel, and no less than 60 (total 78),
steered
men
men were
at
'
at
at the tackles
with the rudder at only 23 degrees.
be interesting to add that on the 12
men
trial 8
with her rudder at an angle of 37
may
It
Lord Clyde's
trial
'
the wheel with the rudder at 25
degrees, thus proving the otherwise obvious fact that
much less power to steer them. The results obtained with the Hercules in the trials of turning power made on the measured mile in Stokes' Bay are, however, of even a more striking character short ships require
'
'
than those just referred
to.
( 14*691 knots), with
speed
When 16
steaming at
men
at the
full
steering
wheels, and the helm over to about 40 degrees, she re-
versed her course 1
minutes,
its
starboard,
a is
—that
minute 50 seconds.
mean of
is,
completed the half-circle
She turned the whole
diameter being 527 yards
therefore
to the
to
to port, giving
In time of turning the
somewhat superior
4
circle in
when turning
and 597 yards when turning 56,2 yards.
—in
'
'
Hercules
'
Bellerophon,'
while the circles of turning of the two ships are almost identical.
cules
Comparison It
is,
'
Her-
however, only proper to state that
heavy ship can turn in
afloat size,
needless between the
and any of the long ships named in the pre-
'
ceding table. this
is
;
less
time than any war-ship
and that there is no merchant-ship of considerable
whether twin-screw or single screw, which ap-
proaches in speed of turning this ponderous and powerful iron-clad.
— Chap. VIII.
Sea
Dimensions of the Iron-Clads.
179
of the turning powers of ships are not as
trials
reliable as those
made
at the
measured mile,
this differ-
ence arising principally from the facts that at sea different ships are very differently
managed, and that
much
so
is left to
the individual opinions of the ofScers in com-
mand.
Notwithstanding these differences of opinion
and management, the records of trials of tlie Channel Squadron show most strikingly the superior handi-
Taking Admiral Warden's
ness of the shorter ships.
Eeport
for 1867,
we
find a table of the results of trials
of steaming in circles, from which I have abstracted
some of the performances of the '
Warrior,'
'
Bellerophon,'
*
'
Minotaur,'
Achilles,'
Lord Clyde,' and
Warden,' in order that the previously stated receive further confirmation.
'
'
facts
For convenience
I
Lord
may have
and the lowest trial speeds, 12 and knots respectively, and have arranged the results in
selected the highest
5
two groups, taking account only of the helms hard over. *
Minotaur
'
nor
'
At
trials w^itli the
the high-speed trial neither the
Lord Warden were tested, not having '
attained the required speed, but the remaining vessels
performed as follows
:
'
Chap. VIII.
Dimensions of the Iron-Clads.
i8o
The Lord
of observations are not strictly comparable. Clyde's
'
beliaviour was,
it
'
will be noticed, considerably
better on this occasion than
on the measured-mile
as far as the distance traversed in turning
is
concerned,
the time of turning remaining almost unaltered
the
Bellerophon
'
on the sea
;
while
took more than half a minute longer
than on the measured mile, and turned
trial
much
in a
'
trial
smaller circle, although the
of the circle she traversed was
through by the
'
mean diameter moved
greater, than that
Lord Clyde.' As regards the behaviour
of these short ships relatively to the long ships, the results are almost as satisfactory in this case as
measured-mile the
'
Hercules
trials.
on the
the measured-mile trials of
above referred to, when under half-boiler
'
power, a speed of a tained,
On little
more than 12 knots was
at-
and the figures given in the report of her turning
the circle at this speed are fairly comparable with those
In going round with
given in the preceding table.
helm
a-starboard, the time of completing the circle
4 minutes 36 seconds, and the diameter of the 500 yards with helm a-port, the time was ;
20 seconds, and the diameter 651 yards
In time of turning at
620 yards. a
Hercules little
'
is,
so far as these figures
inferior to the
^
moved through by superior to the
^
those two
Warrior
'
and
^
Lord Clyde She
Achilles
turning, although the diameter of the circle
same the
'
as for the
Warrior.'
'
Achilles,' but
is
speed the
;
greater than that
ships. '
for diameter
this
'
is
there-
can be relied upon,
Bellerophon and
the space traversed in turning
was
5 minutes
mean
the
4 minutes 58 seconds, and
fore was, for time,
'
;
circle
was
much
less
'
is
is
much
in time of
almost the
than that for
— Chap. VIII.
At
i8i
Dime7isions of the Iron-Clads.
the lowest trial speed of the Channel Squadron,
5 knots, the shorter ships were also proved to have similar advantages, the results being as follow
:
1
82
Dimensions of the h^on-Clads.
the short ships
may
be driven as
by a moderate addition
to their
Chap. vill.
fast as the
long ships
engine-power
;
that in
turning power and general handiness under steam and sail
the short ships are
much
superior
;
and that the
great reduction in the prime cost of short ships
more than makes amends power. That this is so, the preceding
much
for the addition to the steamfacts
and figures
was reasonable to anticipate those results before actual trials had taken place, it will be my endeavour to show in the following chapter. will
prove
;
and that
it
Forms
Chap. IX.
i8 o
a7id ProportioJis of Iro7i-Clads.
CHAPTER
IX.
FORMS AND PROPORTIOXS OF IROX-CLADS *
Haying, tlie
in the preceding chapter,
given a summary of
dimensions and proportions adopted in our principal
armoured
vessels,
and compared the powers and per-
formances of some long and short ships,
now
propose
question of the forms and proportions of
to discuss the
iron-clads
I
from a more theoretical point of view,
trating and enforcing the conclusions
means of reference
arrived
illus-
at
by
to recorded facts.
upon the forms and resistances of ships have generally recommended the adoption of forms of least resistance, and have taken no account whatever of the efiect which the weight of the material in the hull sliould have upon the form of a ship. The most will, however, sufficient be cursory glance to show that Scientific wa^iters
this
generalisation cannot include the designs of
ships.
Take,
for
example, the vastly different con-
ditions to be fulfilled in a merchant-shijD
clad war-ship.
all
The former
is
and in an
iron-
designed to carry cargo
economically, and the weight of hull forms a comparatively small fraction of the total displacement
the latter w^ith a
*
is
view
;
while
in reality a floating fortress, constructed to ofliciency in
powers of offence and de-
Tart of the substance of this chapter was
and Short Iron-CUuIs," read March, 18G9.
Ixifore
<j;ivcu
in a
Paper on
the Institution of Naval
"Long
Architects in
184
Forms
fence,
and carrying great quantities of armour, the
a7id Proportions
Chap. ix.
of Iron-Clads.
weight of which depends upon the form and j)ropor-
The merchant-ship may, with advantage, be made long and fine, since the requisite carrying power can be secured as well by means of great length as of great beam, and the proportion of speed to engine tions of the hulL
power is thus increased. In the any addition to the length leads
however,
iron-clad,
a corresponding
to
increase in the area of the surface to be armoured,
unproductive weight to be carried
in the
and
while a
;
reduction in the length leads to a considerable decrease in that area,
The
form of itself
ship
weight of armour.
any general
armour, will exhibit
ship, in disregard of the
of a ship, say the
we
if we consider inde23endently bow or entrance. To fix our
it
will take the case of the
'
Minotaur,' for which
has been found by actual calculation that in
water the weight of the its
total
even more strikingly
one end ideas,
and in the
impossibility of correctly prescribing
disp)lacement
first
80
feet of the
by about 420
bow
still
exceeds
This excess of
tons.
weight must clearly be floated by the central part of the ship where the buoyancy exceeds the v\^eight
the length of this part being 250
breadth
is
about 5 6
by about 13
feet, its
feet,
while
its
;
and
mean
immersion must be increased
inches, in consequence of the unsupported
weight forward.
This additional immersion increases
the area of the midship section which has to be propelled through the water
by from 60
Now,
bow
let us
shaped
imagine
—on the
this
to be so shortened
one hand increasing
on the other diminishing equilibrium between its
its
weight
total
to 65 square feet.
its
— as
and
buoyancy, and to
produce an
weight and buoyancy.
— Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
Chap. IX.
No
doubt by making
bluffer
it
we
185
shall increase its
resistance to motion through the water, but
we
shall at
the same time lighten the burden upon the central part of the ship, and reduce the total area of the midship section to be driven as well as the total weight.
we may
easy to see that by this means
It is
succeed in get-
ting the same speed with a given power as would have
been obtained by employing the longer and
much which .
heavier, bow. I
have
laid
This
is
the essence of the principle
down, and carried out in
In the design of
but
finer,
practice.
merchant steamships the con-
all
ditions to be fulfilled are so similar,
and the proportions
of weight of hull, equipment, and cargo to displacement are so nearly the same, that similarity of
Nor
is
we
should expect to find a
form in the greater number of these
vessels.
our expectation disappointed, for although
differ-
ences do exist, they are not usually of a very striking
and
character,
this
fact
makes the adoption of the
ordinary ''constants" for steam performance a very fair
standard of excellence
armoured war-ships the case
for merchant-ships. is
very
diflerent,
For
and these
by no means to be taken as standards of shall show almost immediately.
constants are merit, as I
The
constants here referred to are, I need hardly say,
estimated from the two formula} (Speed) (1)
^
X Midship Section Immersed
Constant Indicated horse-power. 2
(Speed) ^ X (Displacement) (2)
^
Constant Indicated horse-power.
These formulai are always used in calculating the results of the trials of ships of tlic Navy. In them it is assumed (1) that, within certain limits, the resitstauee to a ship's
1
Forms and Proportio7is of Iron-Clads.
86
Chap. ix.
motion varies as the square of the velocity, and
that,
therefore, the propelling power must vary as the cube
of the velocity cceteris
(2)
;
that the
resistance
also varies,
immersed midship section the two-thirds power of the
paribus, as the area of
in the first formula,
and
as
displacement in the second formula
;
(3) that the indi-
cated horse-power bears a constant ratio to the useful
work of
the engine,
i. e.
to the
power actually available
These assumptions are not, of course,
for propulsion. strictly accurate,
but they are sufficiently so to render
the constants of
much
ances,
new
comparing perform-
and in determining the engine-power needed in a
design.
may remark
I
service in
in passing, that the
method of
culating the horse-power just referred to reliable
much more
than any methods based upon more theoretical
Nor
investigations. it is
is
cal-
is
this a matter of surprise
remembered that the
difficulties
when
surrounding the
subject of fluid resistance are very great,
and that the
amount of experimental knowledge possessed regarding it is
very small.
On the
other hand, a glance through the
by the Admiralty enables similar in form and proportions
elaborate table of trials printed
one to
select a
to the
new
few
ships,
design,
and from the constants obtained by
those ships to calculate the horse-power required for the
estimated speed with a very fair amount of accuracy.
While recognising the value of the
constants,
how-
ever, I cannot entertain the oj)inion that they should
form the
moured
sole
standards by which
as well as
all
steam-ships, ar-
unarmoured, should be judged.
Such
an opinion virtually amounts to a belief that the chief aim of the naval architect ought to be the lowering of
— Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
Chap. IX.
187
the proportions borne by the indicated horse-power to the speed attained, to the midship section immersed,
and
As
to the displacement.
cerned, this view
is,
out in
its
if carried
far as
no doubt, correct entirety,
it
it
case,
and
to the con-
may
it
This
is,
of course,
be thought unfair to argue
the folly of the system as a whole.
economy of steam-power principle
and
;
siderations besides form
is
if
—such
and handiness
But
the chief desideratum in
is
design, the case imagined
ment of the first cost,
but obviously,
;
would lead
those of the propelling apparatus.
an extreme
con-
is
would carry no weights except
struction of ships that
from
form alone
if
sliip
also the fullest develop-
we once admit
other con-
as cargo-carrying power,
— the failure of the constants as
acknowledged.
criteria is tacitly
There can be no doubt that in merchant-ships creased proportions
and
fineness of form have led,
in-
and
do lead, to increased carrying power, and to economy of steam-power
and that
;
in such cases the constants of
The
performance have higher values. hull would, in
and
I
and
it is
my
lightness of the
opinion, tend to produce these results,
have previously stated that
for merchant-ships
true also in a great measure for
war-ships— the constants arc very excellence.
But with
unarmoured standards of
fair
iron-clad ships, if a similar
of comparison were followed,
we
stances be comparing vessels of
should in
many
in-
which the armour was
of extremely different degrees of efficiency, at the
mode
same time, wholly exclude
this
and should,
important fact
from our consideration.
For example,
if
the
*
Warrior
'
and
'
Bclleroplioir
were compared, we should have the former
willi
com-
1
88
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
Chap. IX.
paratively thin armour-plating extending over a
more than half the length
;
and the
little
latter protected
with thicker armour throughout the length at the waterline, besides
It
having armoured central and bow
would obviously be most
ships, to
waive
all
delusive, in
comparing these
consideration of these facts^ and to
take constants of performance as the sole fact,
batteries.
In
criteria.
such a course would be equivalent to requiring
that the proportion of weight of hull (including armour) to the displacement should be considerably greater in
the shorter than in the longer ship.
At
the same time
the other most important points connected with cost, character
would be
first
and weight of armament, and handiness,
entirely neglected.
In short, constants of performance can only be of use in comparing the merits of
two iron-clads when there
similarity, or at least equality, of construction,
and armament
and when
;
is
armour,
this condition is satisfied, the
upon the values of the constants must be supplemented by considerations of cost and handiness. The merits of iron-clad ships do not consist in carrjdng conclusions based
a large proportion of weights to engine-power, or having a high speed in proportion to that power in possessing great powers of offence
;
but rather
and defence, being
comparatively short, cheap, and hand}^^ and steaming at a high speed, not in the most economical
way
possible,
but by means of a moderate increase in power on
account of the moderate proportions adopted in order to decrease
the weight and cost,
handiness.
It
long, plated
must be obvious
all
and
to increase the
that, if a ship
300
feet
over with given armour, carrying a
given armament, and costing, say, 300,000/., steams at
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads,
Chap. IX.
a given
S23eecl
with a given power,
waste of money and a
400
sacrifice of
189
would be a mere
it
bandiness to build bar
feet long, at a cost, say, of 380,000/., for
no otber
object tban that of driving tbe greater weight at the
same speed with about the same power for the It
;
in other words,
mere purpose of raising the constants.
may, perhaps, be objected
to this statement tliat the
show that a ship 300 feet long can be driven at the same speed, with about the same power as a ship 400 feet long, when the armour is Now, I need hardly equally efficient in the two ships.
trials-
of actual ships do not
say that in dealing with speed
trials
great care
is
required in order to ensure a fair comparison of the
performances of any two ships. difference exist that, until
it
is
many causes of known that they are So
either inactive, or else acting similarly, in the ships
compared, the comparison
is
of
little
The
worth.
quality of the coal, the character of the stoking, the
condition of the engines, and the state of the bottom, as well as the force of the
wind and condition of the
are the chief causes of error in such comparisons
;
sea,
and
the reports on the performances of our iron-clads prove that greater varieties of speed are due to these, so to
speak, secondary causes than are
the ships are is,
as I
first
tried
naval construction refer to
attained on
With tion
to exist
on the measured
when This
mile.
have previously shown, a most important
requiring to be borne in mind
only
shown
it
is
when
being discussed
;
the policy of our for the present I
as connected with the speeds actually
trial.
these prefatory remarks I desire to
more
fact,
closely to
call atten-
the results of a series of
trials,
— '
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
190
Chap. ix.
already briefly referred to in former chapters, which
took place in the spring of 1868, and which were con-
ducted in such a manner as to eliminate, as far as possible, the effects of these sources of error
care being
;
taken to ensure equally good coal and stoking, the
bottoms being cleaned almost immediately before the trials
took place, and the engines, as the
The
being in excellent condition. '
Minotaur,'
'
and
Bellerophon,'
trials
showed^
ships tried were the
'
Warrior
;
but,
'
the present, I shall confine attention to the two
named found,
by
now under
foot of the protecting material
It
has been
—armour and backing
when uniformly
surface of the side
may
discussion.
actual calculation, that the weights per square
in these ships,
to the
first-
performances will throw some
vessels, as their
light on the point
for
distributed over the
from the lower edge of armour np
upper deck, are very nearly identical
fairly be
assumed
that, if the
'
;
so that
Bellerophon
it
were
'
completely protected, she would have quite as strong
armour as the 'Minotaur,' the excess the skin-plating in the '
Minotaur
'
Bellerophon
being put into armour.
'
that these ships
may
'
in thickness of
over that in the
Hence,
it
follows
be taken as representatives of the
300-foot and 400-foot ships previously referred to.
Before being tried by a six-hours' run at sea, the ships were put over the measured mile in Stokes' Bay,
where the Minotaur' attained a speed of 14*41 1 knots with an indicated power of 6702 H.-P., and the Bel'
'
lerophon
'
13-874
reahsed
power of 6002 H.-P. H.-P., therefore, the
by about half a knot.
'
knots with an indicated
With
a greater
Minotaur This
'
trial
beat the
power by 700 '
Bellerophon
does not help us
much
'
Chap. IX.
Forms
a7id Proportions
in our investigation, but
tlie
of Iro7i-Clads.
six-liours'
191 are of
trials
exactly the right character for our purpose, since on
them the indicated horse-powers were,
On
when
as nearly as
Minotaur had only been out of dock nine days, she made 14*165
possible, identical.
knots with G103 H.-P. '
this trial,
;
the
*
and on a similar
trial
the
Bellerophon,' which had been twenty-one days out of
As
made 14*053 knots with 6199 H.-P.
dock,
Controller
Navy remarked
of the
these trials, " the
'
Bellerophon
'
the
report on
in his
had the disadvantage
" of having been twice as long in the water as the other "
two
''
the
ships, and at this time of the year (the spring) growth of weeds is particularly rapid " so that, ;
allowing for the greater foulness of her bottom,
it
may
be fairly stated that her speed was nearly identical with that of the
'
Minotaur,'
when
ships developed equal power.
intend
it
the engines of the two I
do not for a moment
to be supposed that a single trial of each of
these ships,
however carefully conducted,
to establish the
sufficient
is
general principle that 300-foot and
400-foot ships, of the character previously described,
always should steam at the same speed with about the
same power. state tliat
on
But, on the other hand, this,
it
is
when
the only occasion
right to
such ships
have been tried under similar conditions, they did perform in accordance with that principle si
and
this fact
lows the want of force in the objections supposed to
based on the results of steam
1)0
trials.
Having compared the performances and
me '
;
'
]jellrr()})liou
to
'
on
this trial,
refer briefly to
it
of the
may
'
Minotaur'
not be amiss for
the results obtained wiili
Wari'ior' under similar circumstances, althouuh
I
llie
wish
Forms and Pi^oportions of Iron-Clads,
192
Chap. ix.
to repeat the opinion that the differences in offensive
and defensive power between her and the other two ships preclude
anything like a
the measured mile, the
'
Warrior's
knots and her power 5267 H.-P.
5092 H.-P. mile the
speed was 14-079
'
and on the
;
On
comparison.
six-hours'
the speed was 13* 93 6 knots, and the power
trial at sea,
Hence
slower than the
'
appears that on the measured
it
Bellero|)hon
'
fair
'
was about
one-fifth of a
knot
Warrior,' although her engines de-
veloped about 430 H.-P. more than those of the longer ship; and on the sea *
Warrior
than the in the is
^
with 1100 H.-P.
less,
Bellerophon.'
Bellerophon,' as compared w^ith the
^
Warrior,'
undoubtedly considerable, and, taking the sea
as a test,
the
was only about one-ninth of a knot slower The additional power required
'
'
trial,
may
be assumed to
fall
trial
somewhat below
1000 H.-P. indicated, when a speed of about 14 knots The nominal horse-power corresponding to is realised.
power may, with the new type of engine, be roughly estimated at 150 H.-P., and its supply would involve an outlay of about 10,000/. This is to be rethis additional
garded as the price paid for superior handiness,
much more
for
armour and armament, and for an enormous reduction in the prime cost of the ship as a whole a price which it has always been acknowledged efficient
—
would probably have vision is
was made
really trifling
tained.
I
to be paid,
and
for
which pro-
in the design of the engines, while
when compared with
the results ob-
need not do more than refer to the
that the expense involved in maintaining
ing fuel for this additional power
is
it
facts
and provid-
much more than
counterbalanced by the additional outlay required for
Forms and Proportions of Iron- Clads
C H A p. I X.
much
the maintenance of the ship
and that
;
to fall
193
.
larger crew of the longer
in cost of repairs the short ship
is
below the other.
But while
thus
I
recognise
steam-performance of the
with the
'
'
more economical
the
Warrior
'
Bellerophon,' I must again
wlien compared draw attention to
the facts previously stated respecting the relative
formances of the
'
Minotaur' and 'Bellerophon.'
in order to
make them economical
have therefore a perfect right,
the
'
Minotaur
as the
'
])er-
Both
of the long ships had their extreme length given
I
sure
them
of steam-power, and if I
choose, to select
representative
of long
ships
Warrior,' and to say that the Bellerophon can be driven at equal speed with about the same engine-power. I shall only add that the obvious conclusion to be drawn from the relative performances of the two long ships is that more moderate proportions and less fineness of form than had been employed in the Warrior might with advantage have been adopted in the 'Minotaur' when it was determined to cominstead of the
'
'
'
'
'
pletely protect
that
ship,
instead
of increasing
her
proportions to the extent that was done. I
may remark
in this connection that, to again quote
from the Controller's report, " these experiments prove that, "
with good coal and good stoking, there
"
difference
little
" measured mile " the open sea,
and the
between the
and one lasting all
the
of a
for
is
but
trial at the
six
hours on
circumstances being alike
" ;
fairness of the measured-mile trials as tests of
steaming capabilities
The
]*esults
is
tlms strongly established.
discussion of the merits of our lone;
and short
iron-clads, as developed in their various trials at sea,
o
194
Forms and
Chap. IX.
Proportio7is of Iron-Clads.
has often run into error, on account of tbe speeds
and the horse-
attained having alone been considered,
powers developed neglected.
at the time
Such a course
is
having been
of trial
obviously incorrect, as
the connection between horse-power and speed soluble
;
and
it
indis-
has been truly said that complaints of
fallings off in speed,
of horse-power,
is
which were really due
amount
to
to smallness
complaints that the hull did
not drag the engines along at a greater rate than that at
The
which they were working.
fact is that all the
long iron-clads have engines of the old type, which had
been gradually improved upon, until great consumption of fuel
—
it
—apart
from the
had been made
to ap-
proach perfection, and not only was the development
many
of the guaranteed power ensured, but in
cases
power was considerably exceeded. The recent short iron-clads, on the other hand, have the new type
that
of engines with surface-condensers, superheaters, and
other novel arrangements, which, like
all
newly
intro-
duced mechanical contrivances, are liable to occasional failures that could hardly
have been
foreseen,
and can
be easily remedied, but that, for the time, cause very
mistaken notions of their true character. is
As
experience
gained in the construction and working of these im-
proved engines, they, be perfected
;
like the older type, will
but, at present, their
no doubt
performance
is
not
nearly of so certain a character as that of the more wasteful type which preceded them. in consequence of this fact, that
power developed short ships at sea,
It has
happened,
on some occasions the
and the speed obtained by our have fallen considerably below the
in,
corresponding results on the measured-mile
trials
;
and
'
Forms
Chap. IX.
a?id Proportions of Iro7i-CIads.
195
in published reports of these so-called failures, the ]ow
speeds have been given without any mention being
made
of
this will
want of engine-power. suffice. The Bellerophon s
One
tlie
'
'
instance of
engines, of 1000
H.-P. nominal, wxre designed to work up to about 6| times, and on the measured mile did develope the estimated power and drive
About a year
after this
the
trial,
ship at 14' 17 knots.
the
Bellerophon
'
'
was
again tried at sea with the Channel Squadron, and only
made
power being only a little more than 4^ times the nominal (4580 H.-P.). This comparatively small development of power was the result of failure in the working of the superheaters and 11*8 knots, the indicated
other arrangements intended to secure the estimated
cessive
and the speed was furtherreduced by the exfoulness of the bottom. These facts were not of
course
known
results,
of the
full
to the public,
speed
attained
to
whom
the statement
seemed quite conclusive
evidence of her inferiority as a steam-ship, no thought
being given to the question of
how
great, or
an amount of power was developed.
In
how
fact,
little,
on
this
occasion, adverse critics became quite jubilant, considering that the question of " long versus short ships " had
received a practical demonstration that admitted of no
The folly of such criticisms has, however, been shown by the further trials made with the Bellerophon Ijoth on the measured mile and at sea, wdiich have conreply.
'
firmed the correctness of the original measured-mile trial as
The
a standard of steaming capability. results of the trials of all the short ships
summed up
in the statement that,
when
may
be
the engine-
power has reached the amount guaranteed, the estimated 2
— ;
Forms and Proportio7is of Iron-Clacts,
196
speed has been attained, but that, fallen
off,
the speed
also
when
Chap. ix.
the power has
has necessarily declined.
It is
not the function of a ship to propel her engines, but to
be propelled by them at a speed exactly proportioned to the
power exerted
;
and
this is a complete
answer
to
a multitude of complaints respecting the performances
of one or two short ships.
As in
far as our experience goes, then, I
making the
assertion that in
am warranted
armoured
ships, as the
extent and thickness of the armour to be carried are increased, the proportion of length to breadth should be
diminished, and the fulness of the water-hnes increased
and that the
shorter, fuller ship can be propelled at as
great a speed as the longer, finer ship, with about the
same, or only a
little
The con-
greater, horse-power.
stants of performance will undoubtedly be lower in the
shorter ship
;
but they are only hypothetical standards
of merit, and the benefits in point of ness,
first cost,
handi-
and maintenance, resulting from moderate propor-
tions, are tangible facts, far
outweighing in importance
economy of steam-power resulting from the adoption of greater proportions and fineness of form.
the small
One
other point requires attention
when we
are dis-
cussing the propriety of building very long iron-clads the fact that in such ships the proportion of frictional resistance to direct
increased.
It
head resistance becomes considerably
appears probable even that,
if
very ex-
treme proportions were adopted, the advantages
result-
ing from the reduction in head resistance would be
more than counterbalanced by the increase resistance.
To
in frictional
illustrate this statement, I will
suppose
a fully armoured ship to be lengthened amidships, and
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads,
Chap. IX.
made
with a view to increased
finer at the extremities
speed in proportion to engine-power.
In such a case a
great weight of armour would be added
;
the strength
of the hull proper would require to be increased the immersed surface would be as to render
it
197
made
much
so
;
and
greater
questionable whether the saving in horse-
power, or the increase of speed,
commensurate with the increased for decreased handiness.
any, would be at
if
tions that a greater area of
make amends
cost, or
Adding
all
to this the considera-
immersed surface means a
greater area subject to fouling, and
tliat
one of the chief
causes of falling off in speed of a sea-going iron-built ship
foulness of bottom,
is
clude that this
is
we may,
I think, fairly con-
a feature of the question which ought
not to be overlooked.
That
this is so will
perhaps appear more clearly
refer to the results of one or
Before doing
so, I
two
trials
if
I
of actual ships.
would observe that the advocates of
long iron-clads have at various times urged the importance of increasing the proportions borne by the
displacement and the midship section to the indicated
power, and have declared our recent iron-clads to be
wanting in
these,
which they consider the " chief
" ments of naval architecture."
my own
Having
ele-
so fully stated
opinion on this matter in a previous part of this
chapter, I need hardly say that in using, as I shall do,
make a commanner of which
these measures of efficiency, I only wish to
parison between two long ships in a those I
who
favour long iron-clads must approve, and that
by no means ajDprove of
this
method of comparing the
merits of armoured ships.
The
trials to wliicli I refer are tliose
which took place
'
Forms and Proportions of Iroii-Clads.
198
spring
the
in
1868,
of
Minotaur,' and
'
'
which the
in
Chap. ix.
*
Warrior,'
Taking
Bellerophon,' were engaged.
the six-hours' trials at sea of the two long ships,
it is
found that the proportion of horse-power to displace-
ment
^Minotaur' was 603
in the
to 1000,
and
in the
Warrior' 553 to 1000, while the proportion of horse-
*
power
immersed was 468
to midship section
the 'Minotaur,' and 404 to 100 in the other words, the horse-power
is less
*
to
100 in
Warrior.'
In
per ton of displace-
ment, and per square foot of midship section in the '
Warrior
is
than in the
'
Minotaur,' although the latter
the longer ship, and has the greater proportion of
length to breadth. '
'
Minotaur
'
It
is
proper to state that the
steamed faster than the
'
Warrior,' so that
her proportion of horse-power was on that account
somewhat greater than that of the order that
the
proportionate
*
Warrior
expenditure
; '
but in
of
power
might be the same in the two ships, the Minotaur's indicated power would have to be diminished by more '
than 500 H. -P., which
is
than would be necessary at the
'
Warrior's
'
speed.
doubtless a greater diminution if
the
'
Minotaur were driven '
Here then we have a
result
which follows from the adoption of a standard of merit brought forward by the advocates of long iron-clads, but which goes against the theory that increased length
and proportions tend power.
I shall
explained,
if
to increased
economy of steam-
be glad to see this seeming contradiction
that be possible
;
for
my own
part I
am
inclined to think that these facts are confirmatory of
the
opinion previously expressed, that in very long
ships the increase of frictional resistance
is
so consider-
able as to become, at least, as important as the decrease
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
Chap. IX.
in direct
wish
and there can be
;
tbe same time
do not
I
appear to base a general theory on one or two
to
trials
At
head resistance.
199
doubt that limits do
little
exist at wliich the increase of leno-th ceases to be beneo ficial,
whether these
limits
have as yet been reached or
not.
In the course of the year 18G8 attention w^as drawn to the relations
which should
between the form
subsist
and dimensions of iron-clad ships and the weight of material in the hull, in a paper read by
me
Royal Society, and since published
their
actions.'
By
the phrase "
in
before the
weight of material
*
Trans-
" I
mean
the weight of hull per unit of surface, say, per square
and when the armour
foot,
is
included, this
is
very
ferent in different ships, varying wdth the extent
dif-
and
The methods and arguments
thickness of the armour.
of the paper are, in reality, applicable to both completely
and
partially
armoured
latter class ships like the
tection at the
'
extremities,
ships, including in the
Warrior
without any pro-
'
and the very much more
with armour-belts, and central, bow, or
efficient ships
stern batteries.
In order to make a
fair
comparison,
however, between ships having different arrangements
and thicknesses of armour and backing, it
23ropcr to distribute the total
I
have thought
weight of protecting
material over the whole length of the lu'oadside in eacli case
;
thus, in fact, turning all ships into equivalent, but
completely protected ships, for the parison.
^"^T
this
means a
fair idea
purpose of com-
can be obtained of
the relative defensive powers of the ships considered,
before any steps are taken to compare their perform-
ance under steam.
To
afford
a
general view of the
— Forms and Proportiofis of Iron-Clads,
200
metliods employed and the results arrived
given the following abstract, which sent to the
'''
Koyal Society
Paper
Abstract of
The
sent to
Royal
the
Society
Dimensions
object of the paper
is
to
" of her water-lines, should be
"
which her
hull
is
On
the
Weight of Shij^jsJ
show that the proa ship, and the form
made
in a very great
upon the weight of the material of that an armourto be constructed
—
" plated ship, for example, should be " ferent proportions and **
'
to
" portion of length to breadth in
" degree dependent
have
a reprint of that
is
of " Material in the Construction of Iron- Clad "
at, I
:
Form and
" Relation
Chap. ix.
made
of very dif
form from those of a
*
shijj
without armour, and that, as the extent and thickness
" of the armour to be carried
by a ship
are increased,
" the proportion of length to breadth should be dimi*'
nished,
" It
is
and the water-lines increased
in fulness.
highly desirable that this subject should receive
" the attention of
men
" bears most directly
of science, not only because
upon both the
" ciency of future iron-clad
fleets,
cost
and the
it
effi-
but also because
it
" opens up a theoretical question, which has hitherto, " the author believes, received absolutely no considera''
upon the forms and resistmanner in which the weight
tion from scientific writers
" ances of ships, viz. the
" of the material composing the hull should influence " the form.
Prior to the design of the
'
Bellerophon,'
" the forms of ships were determined in complete dis" regard of this consideration, "
works upon the subject
"
aim always
at
and even the most recent
incite the
naval architect to
approaching the form of
least resist-
— Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
Chap. IX.
" ance.
The
201
investigations given in the paper show,
" however, that the adoption of a
form of
" ance, or of small comparative resistance,
least resist-
may,
in fact,
" lead to a lavish outlay
upon our
" sacrifice of efficiency
while, on the other hand, the
'^
;
and
ships,
to a great
adoption of a form of greater resistance would con-
" tribute in certain classes of ships to great "
and
economy
to superior efficiency.
" In
order to
clearly, but
indicate
approximately
" only, the purpose in view, the author first considers " the hypothetical cases of a long
" both of
which are prismatic in a
" length of the long ship
"
its
is
and a shorter
ship,
The
vertical sense.
seven times
its
breadth, and
horizontal sections consist of two triangles set base
" to base.
The length of the
short ship
is
five times its
" breadth, the middle portion being parallel for two" fifths of the length,
" It ^'
assumed
is
and the ends being wedge-shaped.
also that, at a sjDeed of
14 knots, the
long ship will give a constant of GOO, and the short
" ship a constant of
500 in
tlie
Admiralty formula
:
Speed ^ X Mid. Section Indicated horse-power.
"
The draught of water
is
in each case 25 feet,
and
" the total depth 50 feet. " It
taken for granted that the form of
is
" ship has been
found satisfactory
" scantlings that
we may
for a shijD
tlie
long
of such
consider her built of iron of
" an uniform thickness of G inches, the top
and bottom
" being weightless.
" ''
Now,
speed,
let it
be required to design a
draught of water, and
de])th.
slii])
of equal
but
of such
— Forms
202
a7id Proportions of Iron-Clads.
" increased scantlings "
Chap. ix.
(whether of hull proper or of
armour) that the weight shall be equivalent to an
" uniform thickness of 12 inches of iron, the top "
bottom being weightless as before.
and
new
First, the
" ship has the proportions of the long ship given to her, " and, secondly, those of the shorter ship.
In each case
" the engines are supposed to develope
seven times
" their
nominal horse-power, and
" water, &c.) one ton per
weigh (with
to
boilers,
The
nominal horse-power.
" coal supply in each case equals the weight of the " engines, so that both ships will steam the ''
tance at the same speed.
" the smaller ship will be less " larger ship,
we
"
and the
2000
tons,
But
same
dis-
equipment of
as the
weighty than that of the
will require the larger ship to carry
1500 tons additional
smaller
a weio:ht. "
Assuming the breadth extreme
" the
unknown
quantity,
we
" formula given above, deduce " indicated horse-power
;
Admiralty
an expression
for the
thence under the assumed con-
" ditions the weights of engines
"
in each case to be
can, from the
and
coals can be found
;
and these being added to the weights of hull (calcu-
" lated
on the assumption that the sides are of 12-inch
" iron) and to the weights carried, give an expression " for " " " "
the
total
displacement in
tons
of each
displacement Another expression is found by finding the weight of w^ater displaced. The two expressions are equated, and a quadratic equation is formed, from which the breadth extreme is deter-
" mined,
and from
it all
the other values can be found.
"
"
ship.
for this
The accompanying table shows the results obtained by this method for the two classes of ships :
;
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
Chap. IX.
Long
Length, extreme Breadth horse-power Indicated „
Weight of hull coals carried
,4.50
342 feet. 68^ „ 1,337 H.-P. 9,359 „
,570 tons.
7,57(3 tons.
1,337 1,337 500 1 11,750
,3.~)0
,3.50
,000 ,270
..
Total displacement
*'
.
engines
„ „ „
..
Shorter Ship.
Ship.
581 feet. 83 ,350 H.'-P.
Noiiiiniil
,
It will, therefore,
203
,
„ „ „
„
be seen that, by adopting the
proportions and form of the shorter ship, a ship of the required scantHngs and speed will be obtained,
on a length of 342 whereas
if
and a breadth of 68^
feet,
feet
the proportions of the long ship are adopted,
the ship, although of the same scantlings and speed only, will require to be 581
feet
long and 83 feet
broad, the steam-power in both cases being as nearly as possible the same. " Considerations of fully, led
^
worked out more
Bellerophon
'
to depart
from the form and proportions of the
Minotaur.' *'
The next jmrt
the '
character,
the designer of the
so considerably '•
tliis
upon
is
reports of the measured-mile
official
Minotaur
of the investigation
'
and Bellerophon,' when '
calculations
made from
based upon trials
of the
fully rigged,
and
the drawings of those
assumed that a prismatic vessel having the same mean draught as each of these ships, and having the same form and dimensions as the mean
ships.
It is
horizontal section
—which
by the same constant as the ship herself
ment
in cubic feet, divided
water
—
at the
will give the
mean displacemean draught of
equals the
assumed speed of 14 knots, which, as nearly as
— Forms mid Proportions of Iron-Clads,
204
" possible, equals the speed obtained *'
taur
and the
'
'
Bellerophon
'
chap. ix.
by both the Mino*
on the measured mile.
" For each ship the weight of the armour and backing "
is
supposed to be uniformly distributed over vertical
" prismatic sides of the dimensions of the " sides, *'
and the weight of hull
armoured
similarly distributed
is
over vertical prismatic sides of the dimensions below
" water of the " of the
mean
horizontal section, and above water
The
" the ships are thus transferred to
by what may be termed
" representative prismatic vessels,
having the same con-
" stants
ships.
armoured
side.
actual weights carried
of performance as the
" calculations in the paper
The
detailed
show that the weight per
" square foot of the material in the hulls of the *'
ships,
when
distributed over the sides of the repre-
" sentative prismatic vessels,
" for both,
two
is
very nearly the same
and the same holds with respect to the armour and backing. The
" weight per square foot of "
*
Minotaur
'
is
rather heavier in both respects, but, for
" the reasons given in the paper, the " values found for the " found to be
:
Weight per square „ *•
'*
The
suming
" which *'
two ships
foot of hull
armour and backing
,,
questions it
shall
means of the are taken, and are '152 ton. "ll
ton.
next considered are these
to be necessary to also
= =
build
:
—Pre-
another ship
steam 14 knots, carry the same
proportionate supply of coal to engine-power, and
" proportionate quantities of stores, but shall have her
" armour and backing of double the weight of " ''
armour
and backing of the Bellerophon and Minotaur,' then,^ 1st, what will be the size, engine-power, and '
'
'
;
Fovfus and Proportions of Iro7i-Clads,
Chap. IX.
new
Minotaur
205
and having the same mean draught and depth of armour and, 2nd, what will he the size, engine-power, d^c, if cost of the
on the
built
^
ship of the
^
'
type,
Bellerophon type, and having her mean '
draught and depth of armour
this
?
condition
im-
plying of course that the same constants of performance
before will be realised
as
in each
On
case.
account of the great disproportion in size between the
two types of will require
ship,
much
it is
less
obvious that the smaller one
weight of equipment.
It is
assumed, therefore, that the additional weights of the smaller ship (exclusive of engines, boilers, and coals)
amount
and those of the larger ship to The developed power of the engines, 1000 tons. proportionate supply of coal, and the weight of ento
700
tons,
gines, &c., are taken exactly the
same as
hypo-
in the
thetical case first given. "
By
in a
proceeding with the investigation for each case
way
similar to that sketched for the hypothetical
mean
ships, only treating the breadth extreme of the
horizontal sections of the
new
ships as the
The new
the following results are obtained.
the
'
^linotaur
'
type which
ditions will be nearly
490
fulfils
unknown, ship of
the required con-
724
feet long,
feet
breadth
extreme, and have a total displacement of 14,250 tons,
while the
new
feet long, 71
ship of the feet
'
Bellerophon' type
foot of hull in the
380
breadth extreme, and has a total
displacement of 10,950 tons. that a correction
is
is
It
thus becomes obvious
needed in the weight per square
new
ship of the
'
Minotaur
'
as her length has been so greatly increased;
type, it
is
considered that an increase of at least 10 per cent,
is
—
.
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads,
2o6
" required,
and
"
new
is still
ship of the
shorter than the
" displacement
much
not
is
'
'
Bellerophon
Minotaur
"
placement of the
needed in her weight per square foot of
"
'
Minotaur
Minotaur,' so that no correction
'
" are as follow for the
two
New Length Breadth Tonnage Nominal liorse-power
Weight
.,
of hull
„
armour and backing engines and coals
„
stores carried
„
.
.
Displacement
cost
:
New Ship of Bellerophon Type.
Ship of
380 feet. 71 ., 8,620 tons. H.-P. 1,080 „ 7,560 4,460 tons. 3,630 „ 2,160 „ 700 „
510 feet. 75 „ 13,770 tons. 1,080 H.-P. 7,560 „ 7,100 tons. 5,190 „ 2,160 „ 1,000 „
15,450
"Taking the
When
hull.
round numbers
classes of ship
]\Imotaur Type.
Indicated
is
been made for the new ship of the
type, the final results in
'
type
and the
herself,
'
'
the
greater than the actual dis-
"
" the correction has
On
made.
this is the allowance
" other hand, the
Chap. ix.
10,950
per ton at 55/.
„
(which
is
the
average cost per ton of tonnage for the hulls of
made by adopting the Bellerophon type would amoimt to
armour-clad ships), the saving
new
ship of the
'
'
283,250/., or considerably
more than a quarter of a
million sterling.
" It must also be considered that the '
Bellerophon
and
repair,
"The
last
theoretical^
'
type would cost
less for
and be much handier in investigation
and
consists
in
of a
the
ship
of the
maintenance
action.
paper
is
purely
determination of the
dimensions which would be required in two ships, of
which the horizontal sections are curves of
which are prismatic
vertically, if
sines,
and
they were built with
— Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
Chap, IX.
207
the same weight per square foot of hull (say jV ton) as the
'
Bellerophon/ but carried twice the weight of
armour per square foot (say -^^ ton). In these cases the bottom is taken to have weight as well as the sides, the
water
is
speed for both
25
One
24
feet.
in
length,
14 knots, the draught of
is
and the depth of the armoured
feet,
of the ships
is
and the other
side
seven times her breadth
is
Professor
five times.
Rankine's rule for the calculation of horse-power and is
employed, and the same conditions of engines,
&c., are
assumed as have been indicated previously.
speed
The larger ship carries 1350 tons additional weights, and the smaller 900 tons. " The results obtained for these ships are as follows,
when expressed
in
round numbers
Length Breadth
Nominal horse-power Indicated
Weight „ „ „
„
of hull
armour and backing engines and coals ,
carried
:
Larger Ship.
Smaller Ship.
585 feet. 84 „ 1,270 H.-P. 8,890 „ 7,586 tons. 0,124 „ 2,540 „ 1,350 ,.
425 feet. 85 „ 980 H.-P. 6,860 „ 5 540 tons. „ 4,470 1,960 „ 900 ., ,
12,870
17,600
Displacement
" These results are very different in detail from those
obtained in the cases based on the actual '
Bellerophon
'
and
'
trials
more
^linotaur,' but not
of the
so
than
might have been anticipated from the adoption of such a different form of ship and mode of calculating resistance.
the
larger
smaller
The 2000 horse-power which is needed by ship above the power required by the
ship
is
principally
due
to
the
difference
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
2o8
" between the immersed surfaces of the
" '*
is
it
and
ships,
The immersed mid-
spent in overcoming friction.
ship sections,
two
Chap. ix.
by a
will be remarked, only differ
" very small amount. " This
show that the form of ship being taken, and the
investigation
last
best
serves
to
''•
theoretical
'^
most recent rule being applied in the calculations,
" the speed of ''
14 knots can be obtained in the short
type of ship at a surprisingly
" the long type requires,
and
size
than
and
this result agrees
with
less cost
" that of the preceding investigation based on actual ''
trials."
now
I will
refer briefly to another aspect in the case
Supposing two ships to
of long versus short ironclads.
be constructed, having the same
central,
bow, and stern
and the same height of port above water the same depth and thickness of armour in the water-line belts the same proportion of w^eight of hull to total with surface and the same equipment and armament engines of the same type, and with weights of coal
batteries,
;
;
;
;
which would enable them to proceed equal distances at the same speed, would the advantage, on the whole, rest with the ship which had the form and proportions of one of our long iron-clads, say the
'
Minotaur,' or
with the ship having more moderate proportions, say those of the It will
*
Hercules
'
?
be obvious that this
is
a different case from
those considered in the Royal Society paper, and one in
which the disadvantage of the long ship
pared with the short ship eases.
is
as
com-
not so great as in those
In the wholly armoured ship, in passing from a
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clacts.
Chap. IX.
short to a long' largely
;
we
sliip,
while in the case
we propose
lengthen
to
209
the armour very
increase
now about
to be discussed,
belted portion only of
the
the armoured surface, and therefore get the benefit of
length with a less burden of armour.
even
that,
Still
we
shall see
this case, the short ship is to be preferred
\\\
to the long. I
have taken the
'
Hercules
as the representative
'
known
short iron-clad, and have used the
quantities
representing her weights of hull, of equipment and
armament, and of engines, of her
trial,
boilers,
and
coals at the time
and of armour and backing on batteries and
belt, in
order to determine the corresponding quantities
in the
new
design for a ship having the same form
and proportions, below water, as the
'
Minotaur,' but
same conditions as the
in other respects fulfilling the
'Hercules' in the manner explained above.
I
also taken the indicated horse-power
in,
the full speed realised by, the
draught
trial in
'
developed
would drive the new ship ensuring that the
Hercules' on her load-
new
the same
at
speed,
'
Hercules.'
determining the coal supply of the new ship it
which thus
ship shall have engines of an
character with those of the
considered
and
order to determine the proportion of
indicated to nominal horse-power in the engines
identical
have
I
In
have
proper to j^rovide such a weight as would
enable her to proceed at the half-boiler speed attained
by the
'
Hercules,' as far as the
This
at that speed. tlie
l)e
employed
in
all
Hercules
'
could steam
obviously just to the long ship,
half-power speed
as
As
is
'
is
the
maximum which would
cruising services
when under steam. made in accord-
the result of careful calculations
P
—
. .
—
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads.
2IO
am
ance witli the above-stated conditions, I
Chap. ix.
enabled to
give the following dimensions and particulars of the
new
ship
and
;
order to compare them with the
in
corresponding features in the
'
Hercules
have arranged the subjoined table
trial,
Length between perpendiculars Breadth extreme
Tonnage B.O.M Nominal horse-power Indicated
Weight Weight
„
of hull of armour
and backing,
„
,,
engines, boilers,
„ „
in belt
on batteries
,,
and
coals
equipment and armament Displacement
From
these figures
would be GO than the
same
quently
would
less
Hercules.
385 57 ft. 5936 925 6585 4574 1518 398 1460 1138 9088
feet.
325 feet. 59 5226 toil's. 1200 H.-P. 8529 „ 4022 tons. 1292 „ 398 ,. 1826 „ 1138 „ 8676 „
2 in. tons.
H.-P. „ tons.
and
1 foot
10 inches narrower,
is
cost less,
and her expenditure of '
Hercules.'
the merits
it
engines
fuel not be so
Hence, apart from the
becomes necessary in con-
of these ships
to
determine the
prime cost approximately.
per ton of tonnage as the cost of the
average for iron-clads, and taking
Taking
hull, 60/.
which
average,
we
h^l, is
a
per nominal
horse-power as the cost of the machinery, which fair
at the
710 tons greater than that
considerably more, while her
cost
difference of
a
ship
and her construction would conse-
Hercules,'
question of handiness,
fair
new
than the engines of the ^Hercules.'
great as that of the
trasting
Ship.
and that she could be driven
Her tonnage, however, ^
New
speed by engines having a nominal power
275 H.-P.
of the
,
:
will be seen that the
feet longer,
Hercules,'
'
full
it
.
at the time of
'
obtain the following results
:
is
also
1
'
Forms and Proportions of h'on-CIads.
Chap. IX.
Excess in the prime cost of the hull new I nil of ot the tlie new) '
>
ship over that of the
'
1
new
P
.
1
1
,.
1
ship from that of the
,TT '
new
This
will,
ship over
tliat
,
,
>
"
Hercules
Excess in the prime cost of the hull and of the
of the
'
..
2
i/?rArv
(
..
'
we have
to obtain the
to increase the
16,500
)
_
n
.>o r.-Q
f
think, be admitted to be a
I
£.
on a-a oy,OoO
., rr 10 X 00
-Vi^
cn;j:iiies)
Ucrcnks
desirability of building ships of if
£.
=
saving, and one which can scarcely
even
Tons.
1
Hercules
Decrease in the prime cost of the machinery of) the
_ =
2
considerable
show the
to
fail
moderate proportions, engine-power in order
very high speed.
There may, however,
still
be a suspicion in the minds
of some advocates of long ships that the additional cost of maintenance for the
Hercules
'
up
would in a comparatively short time make
'
for the difference in the
difference
what the to, in
I
more powerful engines of the prime
cost,
I shall
considerable.
is
although that
attempt to show
may amount
difference of cost of maintenance
order to clear up this point
must draw
;
but before doing
attention to the fact that the
new
so,
ship, being
more than 700 tons burden greater than the Hercules,' '
will require
an addition of
at least fifty
men
to her crew,
and that the cost of their maintenance will be considerable. Taking 70/. as the average total cost per man per annum, this would involve an additional annual outlay on the large ship of 3500/.
From
calcu-
upon the average consummation of coal in ships with the improved type of engine, it appears that
lations based
the cost of fuel in the
new
ship, for a day's
(24 hours) at half-boiler power, would be in the
^
Hercules' by a
little
over
15/.
less
Hence
that the saving of wages and provisions in the as
compared with the new
ship,
*
steaming than it
tliat
follows
Hercules,'
would cowr
tlie dif-
Forms and Proportions of Iron-Clads,
212
ference in
cost of
tlie
Chap. ix.
steaming at 12 knots for 229 days,
of 24 hours each, in the year.
need hardly say that
I
our iron-clad ships are not under steam for anything
and consequently the difference two ships would be much more
like that time in a year,
in cost of fuel for the
than counterbalanced by the smaller expenditure required on the crew of the
Even
'
Hercules.'
if this necessary difference in the
crew were waived,
will be
it
numbers of the
obvious from the facts
just stated that the interest^ at a low rate, on the dif-
would quite make up
ference of prime cost, additional cost of fuel
in the
'
for the
supposing
Hercules/
her to be in commission and on general service. matter, in
my
opinion,
Having disposed I
should
new
shorter
thus placed beyond question.
of this objection,
is
it is
only
the facts that the
call attention to
being smaller, the
is
'
fair that
Hercules^'
sure to be less costly in repairs than
ship would be
she cannot
fail
;
and that as she to
prove
much
several parts of this chapter, I have
60 feet
is
In
handier.
had occasion
refer to this latter feature of short iron-clads
may
This
and
;
to it
be thought that undue stress has been laid upon
The resume of the estimates put upon handiby eminent naval officers, given in the preceding chapter, will, however, show that this is not the case.
the point. ness
On
a review of the facts stated in this chapter,
it
can,
I think, be scarcely doubted that the policy of building
armoured ships of moderate length and proportions superior to
tliat
of adopting greater length and fine-
The change from
ness of form.
is
the
'
Minotaur
'
to the
was undoubtedly very great but I submit that experience has shown it to be a proper one, *
Bellerophon
'
;
Chap. IX.
Forms and Proportions of Iroii-Clads.
and the construction and
trials
213
of other ships of nearly
the same proportions have tended to confirm this view.
In prime
cost,
handiness, and general efficiency short
shown to be better than long ships. In economy of engine-power long ships may be, and in
ships have been
some
cases
undoubtedly
but since this economy to the total saving,
it
are, superior
is
to short ships
;
inconsiderable in proportion
may be
fairly
concluded that the
shorter iron-clads are, on the whole, greatly to be preferred.
Cost of the Iron-Clads.
214
CHAPTER
Chap. X.
X.
COST OF THE IRON-CLADS.
Ix dealing with the cost of our iron-clads, and especially in
comparing the cost of those
built in the
Royal Dock-
yards with those built by private shipbuilders, extremely are
difficult to
known
lay
down
as " incidental
which ought and material.
a proper basis for
and establishment
is
" charges,
to be
added to the net cost of labour
The
private builder has to find a slip
or dock, building-plant,
offices,
officers, clerks,
The Government has
same
to do the
;
and
so
and material.
forth, in addition to the requisite labour
builder
it
what
but while the
has a direct interest in limiting incidental
expenses to the utmost, the Government, on the contrary, has both to incur expenses
having nothing what-
ever to do with shipbuilding and to "regulate their shipbuilding means with a view rather to contingencies
which may
arise
than to the actual circumstances of the
moment. In other words, the Government own as well as build ships, and both in shipowning and in shipbuilding they liave to maintain large reserves.
The net
cost of dockyard-built ships being
the proper addition to be
made
expenses remained undetermined
to ;
it
and
for
to
incidental
in attemptiug
to settle this addition, the persons concerned
one point
known,
went from
another, until at length in 1865 they
determined to distribute the entire cost of
all
the naval
— Chap. X.
Cost of the h'on-Clads.
establishments, at
work done.
home and
215
abroad, over the actual
In consequence of this determination, every
ship built, say at to a charge of
no
Chatham less
or Pembroke,
became subject
than 51| per cent, on the net cost
of labour and material expended upon her.
The
effect
of the sudden imposition of so enormous a charge
upon
may readily be imagined nevertheless, may be well to aid the imagination with one example. Two iron-clads were built in succession at Chatham
dockyard work
;
it
Dockyard, under circumstances as nearly as possible alike, in so far as the actual current
establishment are concerned, viz.
The
first
expenses of the the
'Achilles,'
was much the smaller ship of the two, and her net cost was 106,000/. less than that of the Achilles ;' but coming under the new system of incidental charge, she had a
and then the
'
Bellerophon.'
'
Bellerophon
'
'
sum '
of 123,411/. added to her actual cost; while the
Achilles,'
under the previous system, escaped with but
13,981/. as incidental charge.
The
latest figures
I have noticed on this point are as follow
Achilles.
Actual cost of „ „
liull
,,
engines ami fittings
„
masts,
sails, stores,
&c
Total actual cost for labour and materials Arbitrary, incidental,
Nominal
and establishment charges
total co.st
:
which
2i6 I
Chap. X.
Cost of the Iroii-Clads.
am
one
g-lad to see that
Mr. Seely's Parlia-
effect of
mentary Committee of 1868 has been
sweep away
to
the more extravagant features of this system of charge.
show how necessary it lay down some reasonable and fixed percentage as
This illustration will is to
a basis for built
suffice to
comparisons between the cost of dockyard-
all
and private-built
It will, I think,
ships.
be gene-
\1\ per cent, upon labour and material or ought to be, an ample addition for establishment
rally admitted that is,
and other incidental charges, exclusive, of course, of
all
consideration of profit to the builder, w^hich does not affect the question
not to
make
—
because the Government has
first,
a commercial profit
by
their
work
and,
;
secondly, because private firms often build iron-clads for
Many
allege.
10 per cent,
and
1
no
or
little
is
profit
—
so
they themselves
private builders have assured
generally sufficient to cover
have never heard the Let us take
questioned.
least
at
sufficiency of
it
1
all
me
that
expenses,
2^ per
cent,
for granted, then, that
per cent, upon actual outlay
is
all
Vl\
that need be added
to the cost of dockyard-built ships to complete the ex-
penditure upon them. clads either at
under
Chatham
We or
certainly could build iron-
Pembroke
for this percentage
fair conditions.
Assuming
this
allowance to be made for incidental
charges on dockyard-built ships, and that the same percentage
is
allowed on the actual outlay at the dock-
yards necessary to equip and complete for sea contractbuilt ships,
it
may
be interesting to examine what the
actual cost of our iron-clads has been,
say up to the
commencement of the year 1868, choosing this date because, when this chapter was first written, the figures
Chap. X.
Cost of the Iron-Clads.
were readily availaLle up
to that time,
this date closes a period of seven years
of the
^
Warrior,'
thus giving
217
and
also because
from the launch
an ample range
for
experience and comparison of dockyard and contract
work.
In giving
tlie.se
figures, I shall take first the
contract-built broadside ships pleted,
racter
;
which were then com-
and the dockyard-built ships of a similar chaafter which I shall consider the expenditure
upon the broadside ships then unfinished, and upon turret-ships, unfinished and finished. CONTKACT-BUILT BrOADSIDE ShIPS.
—
For
Chap. X.
Cost of the Iron-Clads.
2l8
instance, tlie completion of the
'
Warrior
'
for sea
involved an actual outlay of over 48,000/. at a dock-
yard in labour and materials added, in consequence, to tlie
;
and 6000/.
sum
of
tlie
lias
been
payments to
contractors and the dockyard expenditure, in order to arrive at total cost.
of
all
what we have agreed to regard as the fair The same thing is true in various degrees
the other ships.
I
next pass to the completed
dockyard-built broadside ships, upon which the following
sums had been expended up
to the date considered
:
— Chap. X.
Cost of the Iron-Clads.
In order to complete
tlie
219
statement of the expenditure
upon our armoured fleet up to the date above mentioned, I must add the particulars of the sums spent upon unfinished broadside ships, and upon turret-ships
up
to the
as follows
same
date, January, 1868.
The former stand
:
I^NFiNisHED Broadside Suits.
Contract-built Ships.
^
Total Payment 1
on Account of Contract.
— Cost of the Iron-Clads.
2 20
Chap. X.
payments on account of the contract, while the 12^ per cent, allowance has been added in the case of the '
All the remaining vessels have been com-
Monarch.'
pleted for sea, and all
are
except the
contract-built
Royal Sovereign.' This ship, it will be remembered, was altered from a three-decked line-of-battle ship, and '
only the cost of the conversion
is
charged against her in
the preceding table, no account being taken of the ori-
The
ginal cost.
contract-bnilt turret-ships
have been
completed in the dockyards, so that they come under the 12^ per cent, rule; and in the case of the Albert,' the
addition
made
will be seen, nearly 8000Z.
to the total
— the
Prince
'
outlay
is,
it
outlay on labour and
materials in the dockyards having exceeded 60,000/. .
Bringing the above sums together, we have
for the
expenditure on iron-clad ships up to January,
total
:—
1868
£.
Contract-built broadside ships, completed
unfinished „ „ Government-built broadside ships, completed
„
,,
unfinished
Turret-ships, finished and unfinished
Grand
Thus
total
.
.
..
.
.
3,478,772
..
28,198
..
3,876,402
..
666,205 932,772 8,982,349
far I have, for the reasons previously assigned,
dealt only with the details of the expenditure on our iron-clads
up
be interesting
to the if,
commencement of 1868.
It
may
before concluding this chapter, I add
a brief statement of the expenditure on iron-clads for the year 1868, bringing the information up to January,
1869. follows
This expenditure, in :
round numbers, was as
— Chap. X.
221
Cost of the Iron-Clads, £.
Contract-built broadside ships turret „ Government-built broadside turret
„
sliips
300,000 128,500 301,000
„
120,250
Total expenditure for the year 1808
up
„
to January,
801,750
1808 (as above)
..
1809
8,982,349 9,844,099
In round numbers, therefore, our iron-clad navy has cost tlie nation ten
up
to the
com-
mencement of the present year. This expenditure commenced in May, 1850. total annual expenditure upon tlie navy, year by
Tlie
since
that
follows
period,
millions sterling
has been
(in
year,
round numbers) as
:
£. 12,700,000
1859-00 1800-01 1801-02 1802-03 1803-04 1804-05 1805-00 1800-07 1807-08 1868-69
13,000,000 13,500,000
11,800,000 10,700,000 10,000,000
10,200,000 10,500,000 12,700,000 11,100,000 (estimated) Total
Out of have, as
this
..
..
£116,800,000
110 millions sterling, 10 millions only
we have
seen,
been expended upon the building
and equipment of new iron-clads, the remaining 106 millions having been expended upon other objects. It is
desirable that this fact should be better understood
than
it is
sons
who seem
at present.
There are many
to think that
it
is
influential per-
upon new
iron-clad
ships that millions have been annually s])ent of late years, whereas, in point of fact, one million per year, or
222
Cost of the Iron-Clads.
less
than onc-clevcnth of our outlay on the navy,
that has been expended in this
way
;
Chap. X.
and
I
is all
venture to
would be very difficult to prove either that our present magnificent and powerful iron-clad fleet has been dearly purchased at ten millions, or that any other say that
it
ten milhous of the one hundred and sixteen have secured for the
country a more valuable
I shall trust
myself
to
result.
add but
little
respecting the
savings effected by the introduction of the short ironclads
upon
my plan
that preceded
in place of the long and costly ships
them.
The saving has been
—and
is
known by successive Boards of Admiralty to have been
—
at the rate of nearly or quite 100,000/. per ship,
numerous ships have been
built.
and
Chap. XI.
223
Turret-Skips,
CHAPTEE XL TURRET-SHIPS. I
NOW come
question,
a
to
of the turret-ship
consideration
tlie
question
has,
wliicli
to
a large extent,
passed out of that controversial state in which Ions:
remained.
the objections which I this subject, it
wnth
all
it
too
Recent circumstances have removed felt
and have made
to writing publicly it
possible for
me
upon
to discuss
necessary freedom, and to attempt to state
both sides of the question with perfect fairness.
The
and under that
its
many advantages many disadvantages
turret system possesses both so certain circumstances so
introduction almost necessarily occasioned
division of opinion architects
;
but
I
among
naval
must say that
officers
I
much
and naval
have always con-
sidered that this controversy has been unnecessarily
embittered by the unrestrained manner in which
advocacy has been urged. system
are,
this error of
The
however, so great that the only
cftect of
advocacy has been to somewhat retard
extensive adoption. that the views which
I
its
inherent merits of the
its
may do myself the justice to add am now about to set forth are
I
those which I have held from the beginning.
The
first
and most obvious advantage of the turret
system consists in the
facility
which
it
affords
for
training large guns smoothly and easily through large arcs,
and
for
making the same guns
available on both
— 224
Chap. XI.
Turret-Skips.
sides of the
slii}).
This
is
an advantage which has never
been questioned, and which certainly needed no extra-
vagant statement of putting
its
worth
forward, some of the promoters of the turret
it
system, in
its
early days, associated
guns could
that large
plan whatever.
first
with the assertion
mounted and indeed, upon any other
or,
this it
was obviously impossible
and the experience subsequently acquired
in the
wards
To
it
not, in fact, be
worked upon the broadside, to assent,
but unfortunately, in
;
^
BellerojDhon,'
with 12-ton guns, and after-
in the 'Hercules,' with 18-ton
was no foundation
that there
guns
for such
—has
an assertion.
Indeed, upon the very face of the matter, that
it
would be contrary
to all
over an end-jDivot as to
make
it
it is
mechanical
to suppose that a central pivot has so great
It
may
work
a 20-ton
obvious
j^rinciples
an advantage
jDerfectly easy to
a 200-ton turret upon the former, while possible to
shown
it
gun only upon
work
was im-
the latter.
not be uninteresting to observe that one of the
favourite turrets
illustrations
of
the
extreme advocates of
was drawn from a mechanical arrangement
of the very reverse character, viz. the
turn-table at
Greenwich Eailway terminus. This was often as an instance of the facility with which the great weight of a locomotive engine can be turned
the
cited
round a
centre, after the
manner
glance at the arrangement that
it
is
in
fact
strictly
of a turret
itself will
show
;
whereas a
to
any one
analogous to the slide of a
broadside gun, turning round a pivot at the end, through part of the circle.
With Captain Scott's gear, guns even of the largest class are now trained with all necessary ease on the
Chap. XI.
Ttirret-Ships,
broadside
;
same
the
advantage of the
225
true of the
is
latter consisting in the fact that ^vhile
the arc of training of the turret
gun may be made
very great without any increase in the it is
the real
turret,
size of the port,
impossible to obtain a large arc of training with
a broadside gun, or with
gun mounted broadside
a
fashion, without enlarging the port and weakening the ship's side considerably in its
For I
this reason,
and
for
immediate neighbourhood.
some others
have always looked forward
tliat will follow,
to a large adoption of
the turret system in those classes of ships in which
masts and
not requisite, or in which they can
sails are
be so subordinated to the turret armament as to leave it
in possession of this its
prime advantage,
viz. a large
range of horizontal command.
The next point
which
to
bility of fighting the
I shall advert
same guns on both
There can be no doubt that
ship.
abstract,
an advantage, but
sides of the
this
one which
it is
with great drawbacks in the turret system. of these
is
the capa-
is
in
is,
the
attended
is
The
chief
the very large weight of armour in various
forms, mucli of which has to be devoted to the protection of the guns,
as double the
system,
gun
and which may be roughly taken
amount for gun.
that
is
requisite
on the broadside
In other words, with a given
weight you can protect and work eight guns, mounted
on the broadside, four on each
side of a ship, about
you can protect and work four guns only mounted in two turrets and looking to tlie
as effectually as
;
history as well as to the prospective circumstances of
naval warfare, four
guns
it
must of necessity be better
to fight
witli
to
have
on each side simultaneously
Q
;
Chap. XI.
T7irret-Ships.
226 tlian to
have only four altogether, whatever
may
training the latter
very much
lost
This point has been
possess.
sight of
facility of
by many
advocates of the
whose notion no doubt was, and in many cases perhaps still is, that you can carry even more guns on the turret plan than on the broadside plan. The fact is, however, quite otherwise, and would be turret system,
even more favourable to the broadside system than it is, if the same sacrifice of independent training were made
guns
in the case of broadside
as is
made with
guns, viz. that of fixing two guns side
depriving both of
must be borne ships of our
in
mind
own and
Sovereign,' the sels built in
turrets,
all
turret
side,
and
For
independent training.
it
that even in the largest turret-
other navies
—excepting the
^
Royal
Prince Albert,' and two or three ves-
'
Russia and America
and that the two guns
so connected
by
as to
— there
are but two
in each of these are
be compelled to train together
whereas every gun of the eight in an equivalent broadside ship has a perfectly independent set of motions. If,
on the other hand, we were
in pairs,
central
it
to
mount broadside guns
would be quite practicable
batteries,
and give
to shorten the
to the broadside ship
an
even greater attacking force on each side than the turret-ship
has available
for both
sides.
will
It
necessary to bear this aspect of the question in
when we come
to consider
more
be
mind
closely the relative
merits of turrets and broadside ships in respect of their
attacking powers.*
*
This proposal to mount guns in pairs at broadside ports
a novelty.
For example, Mr. J. B. Eads, of
is
by no means an eminent
St. Louis, Missouri,
;
Chap. XI.
Turret-Ships.
227
have already intimated that the enlarged adoption
I
of the turret system has usually been associated in
mind with sails
those classes of vessels in which masts and
are not required.
contended that
it
is,
known
well
It is
have taken a wider view of
its
and has
it
that others
applicability,
all
and have
along been, perfectly
well adapted for rigged vessels. sidered
my
have never con-
I
wholly inapplicable to such vessels
;
on the
contrary, I have myself projected designs of sea-going
and rigged
turret-ships,
which
believe to be safe,
I
commodious, and susceptible of perfect handling under canvas. vessels fiactory
But most assuredly the building of such was urged by many persons long before satismethods of designing them had been devised
my
and
clear
and strong conviction
at the
writing these lines (March 31, 1869)
is
moment
that no satis-
factorily designed turret-ship with rigging has yet built, or
of
been
even laid down.
The most cursory
consideration of the subject will, I
think, result in the feeling that the middle of the upper
deck of a full-rigged ship
is
for fighting large guns.
Any
tlie
sizes
frigate,
even guns of moderate cn.i^inccr,
who
one wlio has stood upon
amid the maze of ropes of all kinds that surrounds him, must feel that to brine
deck of a
and
not a very eligible position
size
away from
constructed the 'Baron de Kalb,'
*
the port-lioles, to
Carondelet,'
'
Mound
City,'
and other casemated and turreted iron-clads which did good service on the western rivers during the late Civil War, has worked out the details of a plan of this kind. In liis arrangement the guns are mounted on turntables, in ])airs, which are trained together, while the battery is constructed in such a manner as to admit of the same guns being fought on both broadsides. Full (Utails of the scheme arc given in a letter to the Secretary of the Ignited States Navy, since publislud bv ]\Ir. Kads. (New York, l>, A'an Xostrand,
—
ISOS.)
Q 2
2
Chap.
Turret-Ships,
28
XL
place tliem in the midst of these ropes, and discharge
them
there,
utterly out of the question
is
in proportion as the size
increased.
to
and power of the guns are
as a central position, or a nearly central
But
for the turret, this difficulty has
position, is requisite
had
be met by
many
devices,
numher of the
to reduce the
and the im-
of proceeding must increase
mode
practicability of that
;
some of them tending
ropes,
and others
to get
them stopped short above the guus. In the former category come tripod masts^ in the latter flying decks over the turrets
the former have proved successful in
:
getting rid of shrouds, but they interfere seriously v^ith the
fire
of
tlie
of being shot latter are
turret guns,
and are exposed
away by them
under
trial,
in the
to the
danger
smoke of action
;
but however successful they
the
may
prove in some respects, they will be very inferior in point of comfort and convenience to the upper decks of
In the case of the
broadside frigates.
'
Monarch,' which
has a lofty upper deck, neither the tripod system nor a flying deck for
A
working the ropes upon has been adopted.
light flying deck to receive a portion of the boats,
and
to afford a
has been fitted
passage for the ;
officers
above the
turrets,
but the ropes will be worked upon the
upper deck over which the turrets have
to fire,
and con-
made
sequently a thousand contrivances have had to be for
keeping both the standing and running rigging
tolerably clear of the guns.
It
seems to
me
out of the
question to suppose that such an arrangement can ever
become general
in the British
one contrasts the
'
rigged man-of-war. in
my
Monai'ch
Nor
is
'
Navy,
especially
with the Hercules
the matter at
opinion, in the case of the
'
all
Captain
'
when '
as a
improved,
and other
Chap. XI.
Ticrrct-Ships.
zic)
rigged turret-ships in which the ropes have to be worked
upon bridges or
even
Sucli bridges or decks,
turrets.
for
flying decks poised in
long the re^^eated
of
fire
tlio
above the
tlie air
they witlistand
if
ship's
own
guns, must
of necessity be mounted upon a few supports only I
am
apprehensive that in action an enemy's
down
bring
with their
parts, at least, of these
bitts, blocks, ropes,
cumbrous
fire
what
that I object to
would
and the tliousand and one
encum-
is
need not predict.
results I
It is for these reasons,
and
for others of like nature,
some features of every rigged
ship which I have yet seen.
The only
turret-
description of
rigged turret-ship which I believe would be at
all likely
to succeed sufficiently to justify its large adoption is
which
I contrived at the
and
structures,
other fittings with whicli a rigged ship's deck bered, with
;
i\
one
dmiralty some years ago, but
of which no example has yet been built.
In this type
of ship the turrets are placed as near the ends of the ship as
way
;
is
consistent with pro23er ease of motion in a sea-
the all-round fire
whole of the
up
ship's side
to a spar-deck,
is
secured
to
them
between the turrets
which deck
is
but the
;
is
carried
prolonged as far as
is
necessary to embrace the foremast and mizenmast, and to
receive their running gear.
The head-ropes present
the only difficulty that attends this plan
the plan
is
to
feet
fa(!torily
but as part of
have even the deck before and abaft the
turrets situated at a to 12
;
—these
good height above the water
liead-ropes could,
dealt with.
no doubt, be
— 10 salis-
This kind of ship would uni^ues-
tionably possess good sea-going and cruising (pialities; iier th<.'
turrets
would possess that unbroken coniniand of
liorizon wliich
Is
the only justification for thfir use;
Chap. XI.
T^trret-Ships.
230
and she might be
as well-riggecl
and commodious a ship
The only thing to be considered is whether even this ship would be better, or so good, as a well-designed broadside vessel, which may be fairly as a broadside vessel.
At
open to question. rience, I express It is well
the
'
no conclusion upon
known
Monarch
'
present, with our limited expethis point.
that both in the
'
Captain
and in
'
the turrets have been deprived of their
primary and supreme advantage, that of providing an
and more
all-round fire for the guns,
This deprivation
fire.
is
in steaming against a head-sea, sails to
the
*
When
be worked.
head
consequent upon the adoption
which are intended
of forecastles,
especially a
it
to
and first
Monarch was designed with a '
keep the ships dry
to enable the head-
became known that forecastle
(by order
of the then Board of Admiralty), there were not wanting
who considered the plan extremely objectionable, and who took it for granted that as a turret-ship the new vessel w^ould be fatally defective. The design of persons
the
'
Captain
'
shortly afterwards, under the direction of
Captain Coles, with a similar but
much
larger forecastle,
was an admission, however, that the Board of Admiralty did not stand alone in the belief that this feature was a necessity,
however
objectionable.
Both these
therefore, are without a right-ahead fire
from the
ships,
turrets,
Monarch having this deficiency partly compensated by two forecastle (6|-ton) guns protected with
the
*
'
armour, while the at
all,
'
Captain
'
has no protected head-fire
but merely one gun (6^-ton) standing exposed on
the top of the forecastle.
very serious question sacrifice thus
made ?
it is
—
The question arises and a what is the amount of the
—
1;
XL
Chap.
is much too who would have
This question
many
^^23
Ttu^ret-Ships,
persons,
lightly passed
over by
us believe that,
if turret-
guns or central-battery guns can be brought within 15 or 20 degrees of the line of keel, that is all that will
To
really be necessary in war.
deny.
we
If
demur
this I
consider the matter closely,
it
;
this I
will be
observed that, in chasing, the disadvantage of having to turn
many
15 or 20 degrees from your course would, in
cases, be
very great, not to say
fatal to success
for in chasing a ship of nearly equal speed
you would
be reduced to the necessity of either abstaining from
enemy
firing a shot, or of letting the
escape.
If
by
steaming at your utmost you could but just gain on her, 1
)y
diverging from your course you would evidently lose
On
her.
would be
the other hand,
you
if
failed to diverge,
you
subject to her stern-fire throughout the chase,
without the means of replying or of doing her any harm.
And
besides all this, there
that
it
is
extremely
is
difficult to
the very important fact
aim with accuracy with
the ship swerving right and left under the action of the Or, taking the case of having to break a line of
helm.
battle, it
may easily be
seen
how extreme
a disadvantage
you would labour under by being unable less than, say,
20 degrees of the
to fire
line of keel.
20 degrees, because, although in both the
and
'
Captain
'
less angle, I believe
warfare this would not, in
fact,
smoke of the action had begun
Now, what formed
I say
Mpnarch
'
guns can with care and contrivance be
brought within a
the
'
within
and a
in actual
be
so, esjDccially after
to
embarrass the sight.
are the facts of the case
in line of battle,
tliat
?
Suppose a
turret-ship,
fleet
with her guns
shut in by a forecastle 20 degrees on each side, to be
Chap. XI.
Ttirret-Ships,
23/2i
At
approaching.
a distance of 4000 yards, which
within range, this forecastle would cut
off
is
from the men
in the turrets all sight of a fleet extending over a distance
of more than 2500 yards, at right angles to her course.
In other words, more than twenty ships as large as the '
Hercules
'
could
the turret-ship
lie
one ahead of the other in
in question,
line,
which we suppose
and
to be
steaming up to them, would be incapable of getting a
any one of them without diverging from her At 2000 yards more than ten such ships would
shot at course.
be concealed
by her
them
500 yards three of them.
and
;
would, in
guns
at
fact,
to bear
forecastle
1000 yards
at
;
The
five of
forecastle
prevent such a ship from bringing her
upon any part of a ship
as big as herself,
and lying within her own length of herself right across her path. the
more
These I hold
very serious
to be
so as this loss of right-ahead fire is
to turret-ships.
In point of
fact,
the
'
facts,
now
to fire
peculiar
Captain
only iron-clad ship of recent construction which
and
'
is
the
is
unable
ahead from behind her armour.
A thousand objections to
turrets are, however, swept
moment we do away with masts and spars in turret-ships. The only formidable difficulty that then away
the
remains
is
that of raising, carrying, and lowering the
boats with proper facility and security.
not hesitate to say,
is
a
And
this, I
more important point than
supposed by some advocates of
turrets.
They
say,
do is
and
so far say with truth, that in action the boats of every
man-of-war are not only
liable to destruction,
almost certain to be destroyed argue, of but
lowered with
little
;
it
is
therefore, they
moment whether they
ficility or not.
But
it is
but are
are to be
hard to admit
XL
Chap.
Turret-Ships.
tliat
no means should exist
even
in a time of action,
233
for readily
lowering a Loat
and there are obviously nu-
merous occasions out of war in which the ready use of should be practicable simultaneously with
the
boats
gun
exercise and practice.
But by placing the guns
in
the middle of the ship, and from that position firing in
— which or should turret-ships — made impossible, directions
all
be, the specialty of
is,
and
this is
ought
it
to
be fraidcly avowed that in respect of the ready use
and easy stowage of their boats real all-round
fire,
turret-ships, with
are at a great disadvantage compared
with broadside ships.
Let us
now
consider a
and defensive powers of
little
more
turret-ships,
are dealing with vessels carrying
sidering their offensive powers,
mind
the fact, to
at
any moment
how
astonishing
two
it is
we
In con-
turrets.
necessary to bear in
which a passing reference has already
been made, that they are firing
fully the offensive
premising that
all
two directions only.
in
considered, probably
little
means of
limited to the
It
how
is
little
recognised, this extraordinary feature of turret-ships has liitherto
remained.
In a broadside ship each gun
independent element of attack, and a ship
may
case of the
'
all
is
an
the guns of such
be directed upon separate points.
In the
Hercules,' for example, notwithstanding the
concentration of her armament, and neglecting her unprotected upper-deck guns, she can bring eight 18-ton
and two 12-ton guns
to bear
on separate
points, thus
striking out in ten different directions simultaneously
with powerful guns. linn'ted to c;ni
Jul
The
'
Captain,' on the contrary,
two directions only.
mncli harder
in
No
doubt the
is
turret-shi[)
those t\io directions than the
Chap. Xl.
T^trrct- Ships,
234
other ship hits with each of
its
The shock
ten blows.
of two COO-lb. shot from 25-ton guns, with full charges
and
at short range, striking within a
other,
must be
terrific
;
few
each
feet of
but so also must be the
effect of
a concentrated broadside from the four 18 -ton guns of the
'
Hercules
and
;'
my
present position
is
that,
while the latter ship possesses the faculty of dealing such broadsides in combination with the power of using
each gun independently, the turret-ship without this power, and If
alone.
it
be said, by
absolutely
is
limited to concentrated fire
is
way
of reply, that every step
and dimi-
taken in the direction of increasing the size nishing the number of guns similar objection, I
is
to
some extent open
must observe that
this is not in
to a
my
opinion a correct view of the case, for the objection holds against an undue limitation of the independent action of
guns of equal power. '
For example,
let
us suppose the
armed with four 18-ton be armed (as she might be)
Hercules,' instead of being
gims on each broadside,
to
with three 25-ton guns, the per gun with the
^
Captain's
being of equal weight
latter '
and
^
tery will then obviously possess the
such guns simultaneously in as tions,
while the turret-ship can
two directions only.
On
Her
Monarch's.'
power of
many fire
bat-
firing six
separate direc-
simultaneously in
the other hand,
must be
it
borne in mind that the broadside ship can never concentrate
more than three such guns upon a
single point
while the turrct-sliip can concentrate four
;
and that
the arcs through which these four can be concentrated
on each
side of the ship are greater than the arcs within
which the broadside to set just
fire is limited.
It is
very
difficult
comparative values upon these diverse capa-
Chap.
XL
bill ties
Ticrrd-Ships.
of guns mounted on the
'^35
two systems, but when
the multitudinous attacks to which a ship
is
liable in a
general action are remembered, the fact that a turretsliip
is
deprived of simultaneous
fire
in
all
but two
directions assuredly deserves the most serious attention
of naval men.
The accompanying diagram
the relative powers of the
*
Captain and '
'
illustrates
Hercules
'
in
this respect.
CAPT^//V. S'hn a Item e o us Fire.
Iiitimately connected auotliL'i", wliifli, to
my
willi
tin's
last
consideration
is
mind, a])pears uf mucli greater
iiiiportaiice fire
Chap. XI.
TMrret-Ships.
236
I allude to
still.
the fact that, as
the
all
of a turret-ship must emanate from two points,
all
upon her may be attracted to those two 23oints, which unfortunately have the disadvantage of being most clearly marked out, being the centres of two the
attack
conspicuous
And
cylinders.
danger appears to that, in order to
me
your
side of
fire
a
this,
special
from the circumstance
send a shell into the interior of a
turret, it is not necessary to
direct
besides
to result
aim
at a port at all, but to
upon the centre of
which a port
is
tlie
turret
on either
The accuracy of
situated.
fire
attained with guns at sea will never be so great as to
make
it
easy,
under ordinary circumstances,
port and hit
it
;
to
aim
at a
but the accuracy already attained
sufficient to justify the belief that,
by aiming
is
at the
centre line of the turret between the ports, there would
be a very
fair probability of
or other of the
your lodging a
two adjacent
shell in
one
ports.
It is fortunately
true that the turret j^orts are small,
and that the guns
approximately
fill
them wdien run out
;
but after making
every allowance for these things,
I still feel that turret-
ships most invite attack precisely
where they are most
vulnerable, and where a couple of shells would place hors de combat.
I
am
also afraid that
with guns
them
j^laced
so extremely close to each other as they are in turrets, a
derangement of the mechanism of one may effectually silence the other, even without shot or shell enterslight
ing the turret. actions to
It will
show how
probably be far
respects are well founded to
me
;
my but
left for
future naval
apprehensions in these I confess that it
appears
doubtful whether a smart captain, in a ship armed
with numerous light guns, might not under favourable
Turret-Skips.
Chap. XI.
237
circumstances range up to a heavy turret-ship, and, by
maintaining a continuous
directed at the centre of
fire
her turrets, get shell or shrapnel into her ports and place her hors de combat without allowing her to deliver
Smarter
a sino'le shot.
than this have often been
thing's
done in war both on land and on
ought
bility of its occurrence
and the mere
sea,
to exercise
some
possi-
restraint
upon those persons who, without experience, and even without reflection, would have us send the entire navy of the country to sea in turret-ships the risk
may
for
;
however small
prove to be in ships Hke the
with lofty and unembarrassed guns,
it
Thunderer,'
'
would certainly
be increased in ships with lower turret ports and carrying masts and rigging, the at the It
command
of which \A'ould be less
fire
of the captain and gunners.
has been generally taken for granted of late that
the revolving of the turret
not practically liable to
is
being stopped by the blows of shot, and the experiments
made '
at
Portsmouth by
Bellerophon
liave
'
firing the 12-ton
at the turret of the
this view.
been supposed to establish
present at those experiments
;*
I
'
was not
but I carefully studied
my mind
them afterwards, and
to
appeared in the
degree conclusive,
least
guns of the
Royal Sovereign
'
they never have
and
for
an
obvious reason, viz. that no shot struck what I consider to be the vulnerable place,
tory on the other point as
reference to the in
my judgment *
fire
of
i
the
^
>v."s
satisfac-
Royal Sovereign,' with
2-ton guns; but
the 2)oint in doubt. f
the junction of the
— the im[)unity of the revolving
in
fitted
is
The experiments were
turret with the deck.
apparatus,
which
tliis
My
ont of honltli, at Malvern.
was never
conviction
is,
;
•
Chap. XI,
Tiirrd-Ships.
238
and always has been, that a large shot striking the deck quite close to the turret, with considerable force, and prevent
will inevitably block the turret
An
revolving.
wards the but
from
iron glacis-plate, sloping upwards to-
my
turret, will not in
on the contrary,
will,
it
opinion hinder this
facilitate
yet seen, and do not expect to
I
it.
have never,
a large shot
see,
moving
with great velocity strike any mass of iron without
much of the mass before it through a space of many inches and the iron of a turret glaciswhen so driven forward, must of necessity be
driving
at least plate,
;
driven into the turret and so glacis-plate
upwards
would be much and perhaps the
;
woufd be a
fix
A
it.
horizontal
safer than a plate sloping safest
reversed glacis, sloping
arrangement of
all
downwards towards
the turret, the junction of which with the turret could
not be struck at
all,
except by a dropping shot, which
could not strike with any great velocity or force.
The foregoing remarks apply
primarily,
and perhaps
down through
almost exclusively, to turrets which pass
manner preferred by Captain
a deck after the
Coles.
In the case of monitor turret-ships of the American type, the junction of the turret with the deck
wdiich
it
stands
is
protected by a massive ring of iron
surrounding the base of the turret which, in
my
—an
proportions than
it
this question,
whose
ability
arrangement
opinion, w^ould be safe and satisfactory
only on the condition of the ring being of
ing
upon
has usually been made.
Mr. Eads, of
and experience
much
larger
In discuss-
St. Louis, Missouri, of
I
have previously had
occasion to speak, in a letter to the Secretary of the
Navy, writes
as follows
:
—
Chap. XI.
Turret-Ships.
239
" I believe that the distinguished inventor of ^'
monitor system has advocated the nse of engines of
" sufficient '-''
tlie
raised
power
by the
being
to rotate the turret without its
central spindle,
and while
its
weight
upon the deck. This would make it, have its rotation stopped if
" rests entirely
" however, no less liable to " the wall were swelled
downwards
" plane of its base in
consequence of the impact of
any point
at
" the projectile near the deck, unless the " engines
was
sufficient to
drag
it
in the
power of the
around despite such
" irregularities, a provision against such casualties that
" would involve great additional " machinery. ^^
The use of
a
weight and cost of
heavy base-ring around the
turret or around the pilot-house, to protect the joint
" at the deck, or at the base of the pilot-house, " partial
remedy
" system.
is
but a
for a radical defect in the rotating
The base-rings around the monitor
turrets
" found necessary to protect the joint of the 10-incli
" walls against 10-incli round shot at Charleston are " about
It is an by 15 inches in cross-section. " interesting question, and one having an important
5
" bearing on the value of the monitor system, to "
how much would be
"walls
at
this
joint
required to protect
against
15-inch
shot,
know
15-inch to
say
" nothing of the larger projectiles that have been found " practicable.
It is
" retaining a system
but a poor argument in favour of
which has
vulnerable point
sucli a
" of attack to prove that turrets have been repeatedly '''
under
" place,
fire
witliout being
when
this
damaged
at their
weak point has on
"been struck and the
turret disabled
weakest
otlier occasions
tlierebv.
The
" ar^'iiment against sncli a system has a doiiMe force
Chap. XI.
Turret-Ships.
240
"when we remember
that the
means of strengthening
" this point against heavier projectiles have never been ''
tested,
and the
may
result of their failure in action
" involve the capture of the ship." I
cannot conceal from myself the fact that there
much ground
remark with which
for the
this
extract
naval
I certainly see reason to fear that a
closes,
and
action
may open up more
is
elements of derangement and
danger in turret-ships than some are willing to believe at present."* to diligently
Meantime it is, and will remain, our duty forecast and guard against such results to
the utmost of our ability.
Before concluding this part of the subject, well to observe
and
small
those
that
fast
it
may
be
sea-going
turret-ships carrying very heavy guns, which were
once so
much urged upon
the
Admiralty even
in
Parliament, are proving to be what I and some others
always said they were,
In order to
'Monarch' have had the the
'
Thunderer's,' to
made more than 31 practical
the turrets
made 26|
to be
Captain's,' for the '
mere chimeras of the
viz.,
25-ton guns,
carry
same guns, are
still
diameter;
larger
;
and
carry 30-ton guns, have been
There are some
feet in diameter.
gunners who contend that
should have been of
feet in
brain.
of the
much
therefore, be extravagant
greater
to
all
these turrets
size.
It will not,
assume that turrets for
50-ton guns will require to be about 35 feet in diameter.
*
In this^conncction
I
say nothing respecting the experience in
warfare had with the Danish turret-ship
'
actual
Eolf Krake,' and similar vessels,
because the shot and shell by which the turrets of those ships were struck were so extremely light as to put the effects of their impact altogether out of
comparison with the projectiles of our present naval guns.
— Chap. XI.
Turret-SJiips,
Now, 35 feet is the full breadth the new corvettes, Druid and *
tons, are of only
'
36
feet
of ^
241
many
sloops of
Briton,' of nearly
war
;
1400
extreme breadth, and are there-
fore obviously incapable of carrying a So-feet turret
inside of them.
the
'
Yolage
The new
and
'
fast corvettes of
Active,' are of but
'
breadth, and therefore, even
weight of such a 3i
and
tlie
extreme
they could sustain the
if
would have but a space of between the outside of the turret In
outside of the ship.
in reality be
feet
tons,
turret,
on either side
feet
4-2
2320
much
less,
fact,
the space would
as the extreme breadth of the
A
ship would not exist abreast of the turret.
few con-
siderations of this kind, coupled with the difficulty of
driving small ships carrying great weights at a higli speed, are sufficient to ships, heavily
show that small and
fast turret-
armoured and armed, are entirely out of
the question.
The combination
of the turret system of mounting
naval ordnance with the monitor type of vessel in the
American navy, and the occasional performances of ocean voyages by American monitors, and by vessels of similar type, have led of that type
may
many
to
contend that vessels
be taken as efficient sea-going ships,
adapted for the general purposes of a navy like our
own.
My
opinion, on the contrary,
that no monitor
is
American type i.e. a monitor with lier standing upon the low deck, unprotected by a
of the
work, and with
all
throngli the low^ deck
sea-going vessel.
her
hatchways,
&c.,
— can be considered a
Such a
vessel,
turrets
breast-
opening
satisfactory
depending, as
it
does,
u[)on
the watertightncss of the junction between the
turret
and the deck, and obinining that wntcitiglitness
Chap. XI.
Turret-Ships.
242
by means of the weight of the turret closing the junction, is unable to revolve her turret and fight her guns in a seaway, a circumstance
which alone renders her
unfit for fighting actions at sea.
And
besides this, let
say what they will about the dryness of
partisans
monitors, nothing can possibly prevent a pure monitor vessel
from being deluged by the sea in rough weather,
an extent which
to
ventilation
is
and comfort
It is for this
incompatible with proper
as
as
it is
with fighting
efficiency.
reason that I have devised the Breastwork
Monitor System, which has been briefly described in the
Chapter on Armour, and the characteristic feature of
which
is
that
all
the openings into the ship which are
be used at sea are comprised within an armour-
to
plated breastwork, the top of which
is
situated,
even in
small vessels, at a height of 8 or 10 feet above the sea level, class.
my
and
at a height of about 12 feet in the
But even with
this provision,
*
Thunderer'
monitors are, in
opinion, incapable of steaming against a head sea
unless they are either of very large dimensions, and therefore
make up
deck area, or that of the
'
for deficient
else are fitted
Thunderer.'
height by enormous
with sunk forecastles
Nor can
it
like
be doubted,
I
think, that even this class of ship will often be deluged
forward by the will
sea,
and consequently
all
its
fittings
be so arranged as not to subject the ship to
leakage from this cause.
is
The experience gained with the American monitors not by any means so uniformly satisfactory as has
been supposed.
manner
It
has been stated in the most public
that in weather wdien the transports off Fort
Sumter had
to
run for safety, the monitors lay
like
Turret-Ships,
Chap. XI.
243
ducks on the water, dry and seaworthy, and were
Of the
never disabled from firing their guns.
following
monitors which took part in the operations
Sumter, in Charleston Harbour,
hawken,'
'
Montauk,'
we have
tucket,'
and
—The
captain of the
'
Nahant,'
the passage from off ''
Passaic
*
viz.
Patapsco/
'
'
'
Fort
off
Passaic,'
WeeNan-
'
Catskill,'
'
the following accounts says
'
Hampton Koads
to
tliat
:
making
in
when
Beaufort,
Cape Hatteras, the wind freshened from the S.W.,
causing the ship to pitch and labour a good deal." letter he says that_, " had it not been for
In another
"the weather
was up owing
the
cloths,
" regularly over the
would
sea
have
top of the turrets."
broken
The
in the position necessary for fighting to the difSculty of raising
defied all their efforts to get
it
turret
and,
it,
and lowering
down.
The
it,
it
ship took in
water rapidly round the turret's base, and at one time the water had covered the fire hearths to within three
of the
inches
fires,
quenched three of
hawken
'
reports
and the splashing she
storm, but says that she
nearly
The captain of the
tliem.
that
had
'
Wee-
behaved admirably
made
so
in
a
much water that The captain
at
one time the ash-pits were covered. the
'
Montauk
of
observes " that on the whole she has
'
" behaved very well with the moderate test she has " had, l)ut she gives positive indications that, if forced
" end on into " greatly, ^'
wnll
and
a sea, if
slie
will strain botli
overhangs
she gets into the trough of the sea, she
wallow very heavily
—
to
such an extent, indeed,
" as to render the breaking of a tolerably high sea over '^
'
the
turret
ahnost certain."
The
of
ca[)taiii
tlie
Naliant' reports that the decks leaked badly, and that K
2
Chap. XI.
Tiirrct-Skips.
244
a considerable quantity of water forced
its
way under the
turret, wetting the belts of the blowers, putting every-
want of air below, and depression of the steam by stopping the
body to serious inconvenience causing instant
for
draught, because of the constant necessity to stop the
The other
blowers to repair damages to the belting. ships were of nearly the same size to
which
I
did not differ
it
When
class as those
have referred, and although
details of their behaviour,
that
and
we
much from
are
w-e
bound
have no
to conclude
theirs.
ordered to employ the monitors on blockading
duty outside the bar at Charleston, Admiral
Du Pont
reported " that they are totally unfit for the duty, and " particularly in the hot season.
In even a slight sea
"the hatches must be battened down, and the "
upon the crew,
" weather, "
deleterious,
weather they are not habitable."
" the
from
and the vessel could not
If anything
The commanding
have to be battened down the
loss of health to
the reports
indeed in such
report on the same subject say " that
hatches would
" whole time,
effect
continued for a brief period in hot
would be most
officers in a joint
"
if
be disabled
the crew."
more were necessary,
upon tlie
fail to
original
reports of her that " she
'
I
would refer
would be unable
"
guns
"
and caulked, they being but
to
Monitor.' Captain AVorden to
at sea, as the ports are obliged to be five feet
work her
kept closed
above the water."
Commander Bankhead reports that on her passage from Hampton Eoads, northward (the passage on which she was
lost),
" she plunged heavily, completely
" submerging her pilot-house, the sea washing over ''into the turret,
and
at times into the
and
blower pipes"
Chap. XT.
(she
was then
tinuing, ''
Tiirrct-Ships,
in
tow of the
says — "when
he
stopped to see
if
" easier, the latter " of the sea,
and
^
the
245
Ehode Island '). Con'Ehode Island' was
would cause the
that
fell off
believes, at leaks caused
by the projecting armour sea, and she went dowi],
Monitor
'
to ride
immediately into the trough heavily
rolled
round the hase of the
'
T
She
and,
turret,
as
let
water
in
the
captain
by the heavy shocks received as she
came down upon the
in spite of
pumps capable
of
throwing 2,000 gallons a minute, whicli were in good order and working constantly. It
may
be mentioned also that, although the
hawken,' as
we have
'
Wee-
seen, weathered out a storm, she
afterwards sank at her moorings in Charleston harbour at
midday, with a large number of her crew, her
loss
being caused by a wave having passed over the deck
when
was open
the fore-hatch
brought her down by the in water
for
ventilation.
and caused her
hefid^
This
to take
through the hawse-holes, and although the
]3umps were immediately set to work, the ship could not be saved.
Three minutes elapsed from the time of flying
the signal of distress to the time
when
she went down.
men up through the turret prevented anyone going down in time to warn those in the engineroom, and of the whole crew about thirty went down in lier. As further instances of the suddenness with which these vessels sink when injured in their hulls, we have information of the Tccinnseh having gone down in The rush
of the
'
'
four minutes with all
torpedo^ and of the
*
hands, after being struck by a
Patapsco
same means, with the supposed
A
very great point
lias
'
in
one minute, by the
loss of sixty-two
men.
been made of the supposed
—
)
.
Chap. XI.
T7irj^cf-Skips,
246
American monitors as compared witli English ships, and the sizes of the American monitors The Passaic class, 844 have been given as follows tons the Monadnock class, 1564 tons; the Kalamazoo' small ness of the
:
—
'
'
'
'
'
;
and
'
Dictator
classes,
'
3250
Bnt the
tons.
fact is that
American tonnages are measured in a way very different to ours, and consequently people have entirely mistaken the relative sizes of English and American these
vessels
— of
'
tlie
Pallas
and
'
'
Monadnock
'
for
example
— as the following table of dimensions will show Research.
Toima^e B. CM.,
wake
of
Monad-
prise.
nock.
993
3345
Kalama-
Dictator,
zoo.
in-1
armom*
1253
2372
eluding extra breadth in
Enter-
:
3777
5260
| . .
excluding extra! breadth in wake ofi
Ditto,
armour
P'eet.
Length
2796
993
1253
2372
2668
4308
)
at water-line
Extreme breadth
The
'
..
iron-clads
195
50
38
In.
Feet.
In.
In.
257
180 Oi
36
6
Feet.
52 10
Feet.
Monadnock,'
'
Dictator,'
American monitors. evident from the above
Feet.
342
50
56
'
'
In.
314
Research,' and Enterprise,' are
'
the
;
Feet.
225
.
Pallas,'
In.
and
In.
Enghsh '
Kala-
mazoo,' are It '
is
Pallas
'
is
not a larger, but a very
than even the size of the
'
particulars that the
'
much
smaller, ship
Monadnock,' and only about half the
Kalamazoo.'
Any
remarks based on the
supposed smallness of these American vessels therefore fall to
the ground.
Several passages in the reports of the
Commodore
respecting the passage of the 'Monadnock' round Cape
Horn have been borne in mind
referred to.
that this
It should, however, be
was not
in the nature of
an
Turret-Ships,
Ckap. XI.
247
ocean cruise, but was a passage from one coasting
sta-
tion to another, calling at several points on the coast to
take in coals, the vessel being fitted with temporary
wooden
pilot-houses,
and with coats round the
&c.,
them
bases of the turrets to keep
would have for
water-tight, but
to be slackened if the ship
There are many
an engagement.
in the passage of this ship with
which
at the time the reports reached us,
eliminating any
little
we
" gale off Point Conception
" two successive "
my
"
Upon enquiry
points, I
which
prepare
however,
was impressed
For it
instance, in a
stated that, " in a
on the coast of
California,
waves rose which interposed between
ship and the mast-head light of the
^
Monadnock.'
found that the light was elevated 75
I
" feet above the water,
my own
" above the sea level.
In
eye being about 25 feet
this sea, according to
" testimony of her officers, she I
find
to
even after carefully
exaggeration.
quotation from this report,
had
the
was very easy."
remember being struck with
this passage in the
report on considering that Scoresby's ocean storm-wave is
The following
only 30 feet high.
gested themselves
:
waves above the top of the time
wliat kind of practice
the other side of these
" the
crests of these
turret of the monitor at the
Could the monitor work her guns
?
find
questions also sug-
— How high were the
it
would she make
waves?
at
?
And
if so,
an enemy on
In the same report
we
stated that " in the long seas of the Pacific to
southward of Valparaiso,
" nadnock' took very " over the
waves
little
easily
I
observed that the
*
jMo-
water upon her decks, rising
and buoyantly.''
Dry decks
under these circumstances are hardly compatible with a steady
guu
[)lal
Inn 11.
extracts from
The following Assistant
mented on
of
Secretary
passage of the :
—
tlic
XL
report of Mr. Fox,
tlie
American Navy, on
tlie
much comobserved when lying
Miantonomoli,' have been
^
The extreme lurch
''
" broadside to a ''
Chap.
Turret-Ships,
248
heavy sea and moderate gale was seven
degrees to windward and four degrees to leeward."
These angles
assume
I
from the
to be
would remark that the danger
to a
more by
wave
her inclination to the
vertical,
monitor
is
but I
measured
surface than to the
AYith respect to the alleged steadiness of
vertical.
these monitors, I
may add
has never been disputed
;
that the general steadiness
but
we have
sufficient evi-
dence in the foregoing extracts from the reports of their
commanders to
to
show that
it
would be a great mistake
suppose that they are exempt at
siderable rolling.
It
is,
all
times from con-
however, unnecessary to enlarge
here upon this aspect of the question, which has already
been considered in Chapter YII.
When
Mr. Fox
is
quoted as having said
" monitor type of iron-clad
is
— " The
superior to the broadside,
" not only for fighting purposes at sea, but also for " cruising,"
it
is
quite clear from the report that
uses the term cruiser in the sense in
nomoli
'
is
which the Mianto-
a cruiser, viz. a ship able to steam as far as
her coals will allow her, which in the American ships a very small distance. says *'
:
Mr. Fox in the same
— " In the trough of the sea her ports will be
to be flooded if required to use
" This, therefore, " antagonist '*
way."
he
'
who
is
rejjort
liable
her guns to windward.
would be the position
selected
by an
desired to fight a monitor in a sea-
He might
have added
that,
when
the waves
rose higher than the ports (6 feet 6 inches), even
when
;
Chap.
XL
Tzirret- Ships,
249
them sufficiently to prevent her ports being flooded, she would only be able to fire her guns when she mounted the crest. He would then have had
the ship rose over
face
to
the further
was and
consideration wdiether there
time, before sinking again into the hollow, to train fire
This view of the case of guns near
a turret gun.
heavy
the water in a
sea
is
supported by the
official
report of Admiral Yelverton, after encountering heavy
weather in
tlie
Atlantic,
recommends a
in wdiich he
Guns
turret-ship 12 or 14 feet out of the water.
in such
a ship would, in other than very exceptional circumstances, be enabled to or,
if it
keep an enemy constantly in view,
were a monitor, the places where she disap-
peared, and where she would be likely to appear again.
Another passage from the same report says *'
comforts of this monitor to the officers and
" superior to those of
" navy."
any other
This, in so far as
:
—
The
"
men
are
class of vessels in the is
it
accurate,
may be
accounted for in this case by the smallness of the crew it
would be very
the niunber of
different if the monitor
men
necessary to
work a
had
to carry
sailing cruiser.
AVe have, however, abundance of evidence from the reports
of officers, after a long experience witli the
American monitors,
to
prove that they are not well
ventilated or comfortable.
opinions of Admiral the monitor
fl(!C't
I
have already given
Du Pont and
at Charleston
kept on outside l)lockading duty.
engaged against Drew's Bluff
down
tlie
commanders of
the
on their ventilation, 'J'lie
*
if
^lonitor,'
when
had
drop
batteries,
to
the river out of action, because of the exhaustion
of the crew.
140 degrees,
The thermometer in the turret and the commander says that at
stood at tlie
time
'
Chap. XI.
Turret-Ships.
250 of writing
one-third of his crew were suffering
tlie letter
We
from dcbiHty.
have instances of the blowing appa-
becoming deranged, sto23ping the draught, and
ratus
driving the crew on deck, and of great discomfort to the
crew from leaks
the passage of the
passages "
:
'
Monadnock,' we
— " Sixteen
officers'
reports of
find the following
firemen and coalheavers
of the
have been removed from the fire-room in a
" insensibility."
And
state of
again, from another place,
—
commander writes removed from the fire-room
find the "
In the
in the deck.
:
"
we
Seven men have been
in an insensible condition
" from the effects of the heat."
A
few
facts respecting the fighting qualities of the
American monitors, drawn from the reports of
who
officers
served in them during the late war, will doubtless
prove interesting, and will serve to
illustrate
some of
the preceding remarks on the advantages and disadvantages of the turret system.
I
need hardly say that
most of the services of these vessels consisted in blockading harbours and the mouths of rivers, and in attacking land
There were only two or three occasions on
forts.
which monitors had
to
any pretensions.
clads of
the original
'
Monitor
'
and again been referred the
but
compete with Confederate ironin
The first action fought by Hampton Eoads has again
to as
an incontestable proof of
superiority of the 'Monitor' to the
the
official
show that the
accounts
received considerable assistance from the '-
Minnesota,' and that the
when
bow had been
'
'
Merrimac
'
Merrimac '
;'
Monitor
wooden
frigate
only withdrew
by ramming. These facts are the more remarkable when it is remembered that the Merrimac was only an improvised and hastily her
'
'
injured
;'
Chap. XI.
Ttirrct-Ships.
251
constructed iron-clad, her armour being said to consist
of railway bars, while the
minor exceptions,
'
Monitor
was,
'
in all respects a pattern vessel of the
type to which she gave her name.
engagement monitor ship
*
to
which
'
Atalanta
;
'
and
The only other
I shall refer is that
Weehawken and
'
a few
w^itli
between the
the Confederate casemated
this certainly afforded
no better
information respecting the real merits of monitors as
compared with broadside
was
The
iron-clads.
originally an iron merchant-ship,
Atalanta
and when con-
down
verted into an iron-clad, she was cut
'
to a foot or
two above the water, and upon the low hull a casemated battery was built, armoured with two layers of bar iron, 2 or 2i inches thick, and G or 7 inches wide in fact,
has been stated that the bars were made of
it
English railroad iron rolled out
It is surely
flat.
no
wonder that such a structure should have been smashed in by the blows of the 15-inch shot from the Wee*
hawken's the
'
'
Atalanta
way down that,
guns, especially '
when
it
'
considered that
had unfortunately got aground on her squadron nor is it surprising
to the Federal
;
under such circumstances, the
lanta's
is
fire
guns should have been almost
from the
Ata-
ineffective against
Weehawken's deck and turret. Although our information respecting the
the
'
^
'
capabilities
of monitors as compared with other iron-clads
meagre, the reports give
full
is
accounts of the engage-
ments of these ships with the land fortifications Charleston and elsewhere and from these accounts ;
is,
1 think, possible to infer,
so
at it
with considerable accuracy,
what effects would be produced on an American monitor by heavy guns well mounted, and worked on board an
Chap. XI.
Turret-Ships.
252 iron-clad
In the
engaging her.
ton, seven monitors
first
attack on Charles-
Du
were engaged, and Admiral
Pont, who commanded, states that in 40 minutes four of these ships were disabled either wholly or partially. the turrets In two ships the Nahant and Passaic became jammed, although in the latter it was got in
—
'
'
'
'
motion again after some delay
in the
;
*
—
Nantucket the '
became jammed, several shots striking
port-stopper
very near the port, and driving
in the plates,
the further use of the 15-inch
gun during the gun could not
and
in the
'
Patapsco,' the rifled
commanding
their opinion, "
officers of it
action;
be used
In their joint report on this attack,
after the fifth fire.
the
preventing
the monitors stated that^ in
had been proved that any heavy
was very apt to disorder and stop "• it," and " that the side armour and decks were pene" trable." They also give a summary of the injuries received by the various ships, in order to justify their **
blow on the turret
opinion that " "
it
would have been out of the question to
renew the action the next day."
through that
it
this
summary
I
shall
not go
in order, but shall simply state
entirely supports the views I
have previously
expressed regarding the danger of turrets being
jammed
by the driving inwards of base-rings or glacis-plates, and the liability to injury from shot entering or striking close to the turret ports.
In
his
report on the
attack on
Fort McAllister,
Captain Drayton confirms the accuracy of the latter opinion, stating that " the gunners in the fort never " exposed themselves to the fire of the monitors
;
they
" usually discharged their pieces either while the moni" tors
were loading or
just as the port
came in
line,
Turret-Ships.
Chap. XI.
*'
2,53
and before the guns were quite ready
" being painted black not deceiving
the turrets
;
them any more
" than a different colour had done on the
attack."
first
This extract also shows the want of force in the state-
ment that has been
made respecting
so often
advantages resulting from being able to turret ports from
this
but at the same time
the
he chooses, pour upon her an unopposed
the turret ports are turned fire,
turret
the monitor's
powers entirely disappear, and an enemy can,
offensive if
;
the
turning away of the ports does
prevent the possibility of shot entering
through them
great
turn away
an enemy while the guns are being
Of course,
loaded.
tlie
away
fire
while
or he can reserve his
;
as the Confederate gunners did, until the turret
has just been brought round into
guns are
still
unprepared to
line,
but while the
This report also bears
fire.
testimony to the vulnerability of the low decks.
One
other report will sufiSce to
monitors can stand the
fire
of
show how American armed, be
forts,
it
remembered, with nothing heavier than 10-inch and The second attack on the batteries at 7-inch guns. Charleston was
made
at night
but notwithstanding
;
this fact, the monitors were often hit
particularly on the decks,
penetrated.
jammed
deranged
in one case
the
—around
stroying the ship's steering
The
many
cases
turret-spindle
as to carry the pilot-liouse
have remained fixed
her.
in
were
Several of the turrets were more or less
and
;
which
and badly injured,
o])inion
of
—which
was
so
ought to
with the turret, thus deapparatus, and
American
ofiicers
disabling
seems
to
be
that turrets like those of the monitors are especially liable to l)e
driven onl of
llieir
proper
[)()sition,
which
is
Chap. xi.
Turret-Ships.
254
perpendicular to the deck, by the spindles becoming
when the turrets are struck by heavy shot. Yery similar consequences seem to result from
bent
straining unavoidable in a seaway
whom
;
have before referred, says on
I
" perience has
the
and Mr. Eads, this j)oint
:
to
— " Ex-
shown that the rotation of the turret is by the straining of the vessel
" greatly interfered with " in a
seaway
;
the slightest deviation from a perfect
" plane in the form of the base-ring on " being sufficient to create
enough
which
friction to
" sometimes prevent rotation altogether. *'
tonomoh,' on her late cruise,
add
that, in
is
it
rests
check and
The
a case in point."
*
MianI
some of the monitor turret-ships built in
may this
country for foreign governments, similar accidents have occurred through the spindle of the turret becoming strained
by the
ship's rolling at sea, those in
having lowered the turret down upon
ought
to
have done. The
liability to
its
charge not
bed, as they
such accidents has,
as I have shown, the effect of practically destroying the
fighting powers of monitors at sea,
thus mounted on central spindles.
arrangement there
is
when the turrets are With Captain Coles'
not the same danger, as the turret is
carried on a set of rollers fixed in a band at the circumfer-
ence of the turret-base, and
is
simply centred on a spindle.
I will not further extend these ships.
I
have into
turret-
said sufficient, I hope, to indicate that if
we have made duction
remarks upon
a mistake with reference to the intro-
the
British
Navy
of turret-ships,
especially of monitors, that mistake has consisted
adopting them too rapidly, rather than too slowly. least there has
been ample
and in
At
cause for the exercise of
prudence and caution in introducing them.
Rams,
Iro7i-Clad
Chap. XII.
255
CHAPTER XIL IROX-CLAD RAMS.
Simultaneously with the introduction plating, numerous proposals were made the ancient metliod of naval warfare or sinking an
years before,
of
armour-
for reviving
—that of disabling
enemy by ramming. It is true that some when our wooden steam fleet was being
constructed, some naval officers tion to the subject,
and had
had turned
insisted
on the
their atten-
possibility of
using our line-of-battle ships and frigates as rams for various reasons the idea
was not worked
had passed out of consideration
at the time
;
but
out,
and
when
the
was commenced. As soon, however, as tlie Warrior's design was determined on, the matter again came into prominence, and that ship iron-clad
reconstruction '
'
was, as I have said in another chapter, built in such a
manner
—with a
ram stem
inside the knee-of-the-head,
and with internal strengthenings
—
capable of being employed as a ram. iron-clads, also,
more or
less
as
In
;
and
all
succeeding
efficient provisions
been njade to strengthen the bows for pose
render her
to
tlie
have
same pur-
in this chapter I propose to consider briefly
what, as far as our experience enables us to judge, are tlie
best
rams.
means
for
securing efficiency in
I shall, as far as possible,
iron-clad
inform the reader also
of the conclusions at which naval officers in our
Navy, and
in the navies of other couiitrii's,
own
liaw nnived,
;
Iron-Clad Rams.
256 giving special
prominence, as
is
Chap. xii.
but
right,
opinions entertained by Austrian and American
both of It
whom
may
have seen actual
be interesting to
the greater weight
ramming
was
the
to
officers,
service.
passing on, that
state, before
at first
given to efficiency in
pov/er on account of the fact that the 4^-inch
armour, carried by the earlier ships, was practically impenetrable to the 68-pounder gun, then the heaviest carried on the broadside.
ramming contended
On
account the advocates
this
was an absolute necessity to avail ourselves of the attacking power possessed by a a power which, ship in virtue of her weight and speed of
that
it
—
when
effectually
employed, would
suffice to
down
cut
Since and sink even the most formidable adversary. that time, the power of the armaments of iron-clads has, as I have shown, been greatly increased
;
and
it is
only
our most recent ships that are practically impenetrable to our 25-ton
now
and 30-ton 600-pounder guns.
the argument in favour of
momentum,
as one of the
But even
making use of a
ship's
most important features in her
powers of attack, remains in
full force
;
and in
all
recent ships care has been taken to provide such
our
bows
as will enable them to inflict damage on an enemy without themselves The French is hoped, any serious injury.
and bow-strengthenings the greatest receiving,
have
it
also fitted their iron-clads
but the fact that most
for similar services
of their ships are wood-built
prevents the bows being so effectually strengthened as
they can be in iron ships.
French navies
also,
In both our
within the
last
own and
the
few years, ships
have been included which are designed specially for
ramming, and thercfoie carry only one or two of the
Iron-Clad Rams,
Chap. XII.
The French
most powerful guns.
257
led the
way
in this
by constructing the Taureau ;' and they have put four more rams on the stocks, one of which, Cerbere,' is now fitting, and the other three are
direction since
'
the
'
still
building.
—the
^
We
Hotspur
'
have two such vessels now building
and the
'
Rupert
'
—which bear some
general resemblance to the French rams, although they are differently constructed, and are of a less unusual
All these ships depend upon their powers of
form.
ramming for the main strength of their attack, but are by no means incapable of fighting with their heavy guns at long ranges, and of engaging an enemy while steaming up to attack him. They are not to be rigged as sailing ships, although they will carry a small spread
of canvas, but will really be steam war-engines capable either of delivering a tremendous
blow or of manoeuvr-
ing and fighting with their heavy guns.
Ships like
attached to a squadron of iron-clads, or lying
these
under easy steam in the Channel, or naval stations
—
say, off Gibraltar
off
—would
one of our
undoubtedly
be of great value in time of war.
During the
late
American war, both
themselves of this method of attack reports
of Federal officers
federates
it
;
sides availed
and from that
a]3pears
official
the
Con-
produced some of the most extraordinarily
shaped vessels for ramming that could possibly be devised,
and which could only be used
rivers or harbours. also
Most,
were strengthened
many
if
for
not
all,
ramming
for service in
of the monitors purposes,
and
of the engagements, particularly those that took
place on the western rivers, were decided, not by artillery, but
by ramming.
The
fiict
that the vessels used s
— Iron-Clad Rams.
^8
Chap. Xil.
were
in this contest, especially the Confederate ships,
comparatively weak, very slow^ and not at all handy, prepares ns for the conclusion to which a study of the
war conducts, viz. that in most cases where such a ship was fairly struck by a ram she sank. It
reports of the
cannot, of course be assumed that with stronger, swifter,
and handier ships similar results would be obtained and American officers have been among the first to point this ;
out
;
but the conviction of these
ramming, after
officers
with regard to
their experience in the war,
may be
fairly
summed
up in the words of Admiral Goldsborough
Every
iron-clad, as a matter of course, should be
*'
" unexceptionable *'
ram
;
or, in
:
an
other words, susceptible
herself of being used as a projectile."
The engagement
at
Lissa
more conclusive
affords
evidence of the great results that
may
be achieved by
the proper use of this method of attack, especially in
This engagement, as
actions between sea-going ships. is
well known, resulted in the total defeat of the Italian
fleet,
that defeat being in a great measure due to the
excellent performances of the Austrian ship
Max,' which rammed and sank the
damaged other from these
ships severely.
The
results I shall hereafter
Re
*
'
is
most natural
aspects
:
first,
how
attempt to set forth.
to consider the
efficiency,
subject under
two
best to construct and prepare a ship
for inflicting the greatest
damage upon an enemy with
the least possible injury to herself; second,
manoeuvre and work such a ship when in first
and
lessons to be learnt
In dealing with the question of ramming it
Ferdinand
d' Italia/
of these points
is,
interest to tlie naval
of course, as architect
as
action.
much
it
is
how
to
best to
The
a matter of the naval
Iron-Clad Rams.
Chap. XI r.
officer
naval
;
the second
is
peculiarly
strive to
business
tlie
I shall refer to both, treating the
officer.
some length, and the
at
259
set
and
forth,
only
latter to
weigh
and
briefly,
the
fairly,
of the
former shall
various
opinions entertained on the subject.
In order that a ship obvious,
The
of
first
may
be
it
is
that she must be handy under steam.
all,
of the blow she can deliver
effect
ram,
efficient as a
in a large
is
measure dependent on the directness of her attack, and an oblique or glancing blow on an enemy's side might
much damage
sometimes do as
When
the ship she attacks.
down upon the
a
shijD at rest, as
Cumberland
'
'
at
Max
*
Merrimac
Newport News,
'
upon the
did
Ee
d' Italia
by ramming can scarcely
when an enemy command of the
is
fail
'
as the
much more
is
subject,
much
It is as clear as
"
opportunity
evade the attack
capable of being manoeuvred
Report on the Channel Fleet
says
:
perfectly under
and others who have written upon Admiral have recognised these facts.
in his
" a ship has
But
officers,
Warden,
—"
Ferdinand
rapidly.
All naval the
'
successful.
is
for lier either entirely or partially to is
did upon
or upon a vessel
to be
steersman, there
'
at Lissa, the attack
under way, and
of a ram, unless the latter
herself as to
a vessel steams directly
the
which can only manoeuvre sluggishly, '
ram
to the
anything can be
for 1868,
that, so
long as
good way on her, and a good command of
steam to increase her steam at pleasure, that ship
what is called rammed she cannot even be any purpose so long as she has room, and is properly handled. The use of ships as rams, it appears
" cannot be
'
;'
" struck to "
" to me, will only be called into play after an action has
—
"
commenced, when
'•
low rate of speed
be stated ahlv
Chap. XII.
Irofi-CIdd RajJiS.
26o
reduced to a
ships, of necessity, are
— prohahly their lowest."
It
Admiral Warden does not look
tliat
so lavonr-
attack by raiumiiii;' as some other officers, so
o\\
ramming
that his remarks on the difficulty of effectually
a steamship are
weight, inasmuch as they
of great
rams into the most pro-
indirectly bring handiness in
minent
should
In his accompanying Keport, Admiral
position.
Ryder goes answer
fully into the discussion of this point in his
\o the question
—
AVhat
'^
your opinion,
class, in
" presents the greatest advantage for giving effect to
"ramming
He
or otherwise?"
short class exemplified in the class of
which the
'
'
AVarrior
" short class to hit the
"
her which
and
it
is
she
if
'
to the
Minotaur
is
therefore ;
as little as possible
on her stem, as
;
This able sunuiiary requires,
officers, I
1
more
if,
to these
''
Among
these elements
''
and
it
is
own stem
easily tinned."
on the point
opinions of English
add an extract from the Ei-port of the
elements of efficiency
as
is
in
In
iron-clads,
speaking of he says
in
:
that of celerity in turning,
a point to which sufficient attention has
" not been given hitherto, I wish to impress " victions
likely
think, no further remarks
American Admiral Goldsborough. the
The
to hit her at
;
in order to enforce its important bearing
naval
''
minimise the wrenching strain
to
this short class is
now under discussion. It may be interesting
are ex-
more
" about the desired angle, so as to injure our
"'
long
to hit that part of
desired to penetrate
'*
'
:
moving
is
'
— preference, says
the handiest, and
is
enemy
''
Belleroi)hon
'
amj^les, and, in justifying this
decidedly prefers the
regard to
it."
Then, applying
my
con-
this \o
Iron-Clad Rams.
Chap. XII.
261
rams, he adds, respecting their success
:
—" This, how-
**
ever, cannot be the case unless they can be directed
'^
witli
a great degree of pioinptness to any desind
"quarter, or turned with every degree of quickness " necessary."
Farther on
says
lie
:
—
"
But
to return to
" the point of celerity in turning, no practical means,
"in niy judgment, should be neglected, more " ticularly ^'
an iron-clad,
in
secure
to
this
par-
cardinal
quality."
These are a few specimens of the opinions entertained
men
by naval
respecting
handiness in iron-clad rams this facility of mancjcuvring
;
necessity
the
means of
the
obtaim'iig
The
next claim attention.
chief of these consists, as I have
shown
in
preceding
chapters, in the adoption of moderate dimensions
proportions, in combination with improved
for
and
means of
steering,
and more especially with the use of balanced
rudders.
Having so fully illustrated the superiority in power of our short ships as compared with the
steering
Warrior'
*
more
and
^^linotaur'
tlian refm- the reader to
there find the criticisms
respecting
resnlts
<^>f
of
Without doubt,
them.
and some
and that
we compare
10 seconds at
full
1
am
correct
and
their preference
the
*
so
.smaller ships
in
Navy
which was inaugurated
to shorter
Belleroplion,'
fact that recent ships are
If
tiniiinii",
majority of the oflicers in our
larg(3
bad ])reviously been in vogue as Ihe iron-clads,
need not do
Chapter YIIF., as he will
li-ials
are in favour of the change,
the
I
on the opim'ons which have been ex])ressed
saying that a
*
classes,
in
than
tyjK's of first-class is
based uj)on the
much more managealde.
AVarrior,'
taking
minutes
speed to go round a circle of 1050
.
Iron- Clad Rams.
262
yards
diameter,
with
the
turning to starboard at
— considerably Warrior' —
less
'
Chap,
1 1
which when
Hercules,'
full sjDced
x
took only 4 minutes
than half the time taken by the
go round a circle of only 527 yards must apjoear that the shorter ship has a to
*
diameter,
much
it
an enemy
better chance of striking
fairly, or
of
avoiding a charge, than the long ship.
The reduction
in
dimensions here
alluded
to,
blow
course, leads to a reduction in the force of the
which the ship can
made it
at the
may
deliver, supposing the attack to be
same speed and with equal
be thought that this fact
No
longer and larger ships. in
opinion,
this
of
directness,
in favour of the
tells
doubt there
but there are
and
one
some truth
is
or
two
points
requiring notice which considerably modify an estimate of
its
For
importance.
instance,
it
scarcely reason-
is
able to suppose that the longer ship could in general attack an
enemy with
a directness equal to that of the
shorter ship, seeing that the latter
On
readily handled.
much more the
is
so
much more
this account oblique attacks are
likely to result in the diminished force of
blows delivered by long ships than in those by
short ships
;
so that
on
less difference, if there
ships
this
account there will be
be any, in favour of the larger
than their greater weight would lead one to Besides this
anticipate.
it is
quite unnecessary to com-
pare the attacking powers of two smaller one
blow
far
armoured built.
much
is
rams when the
able at a moderate speed to deliver a
heavier than side of
is
required
any ship yet
Taking, for example, a
to
smash
in
the
built or likely to be
shijo like
the
'
Eupert,'
of about 5000 tons weight, and supposing her to charge
Chap. XII.
Iro7i-Clad
Rams.
263
an enemy
at a fair speed, say at 10 knots per liour, the " energy " of the blow she can strike is measured by
about 22,300 foot-tons
;
and we know from the
trials at
Shoeburyness that the GOO-lb. shot from a 25-ton gun is
capable of penetrating
all
example, at a short range,
when the
although
Kupert's
What
attack
'
?
"
its
leaves the muzzle of the gun,
it
over 6000 foot-tons. *
the French iron-clads, for
energy,"
only a
is
then must be the
little
and what would be gained by
doubling her size and making her of 10,000 tons placement, like the
made
could be
*
Minotaur,' even
to strike as fairly,
out of the question
?
of
effect
The blow
if
which
struck
dis-
the larger ship as a rule,
is,
by the
ship would obviously be heavier, but then
lieavier
must be
it
evident from the preceding figures that* the smaller ship has a very large reserve of power, and that quite unnecessary to add to
it,
the Eeport from which I have
Admiral Hyder,
sented by the
Minotaur
and
'
^
Warrior
^
"
no doubt, of great importance
weight
" but
are,
have
both classes
'
on the other
speed
:
re2:)re-i
on the one
'
— " Speed and
hand and the
Bellerophon
in
already quoted, says
with respect to the long and short iron-clads, '
is
especially as in doing so
away from her handiness.
w^e take
it
in ramming*,
enough and weight
" enough for the purpose." Tlie reader will, I think, be inclined to believe that this is really less
than might be said on the subject;
and that smaller ships than the and
are,
thoroughly
efficient as
'
Belleroj)]ion
rams.
'
may
be,
The Admiralty
and the French authorities have both acted on these considerations, in designing ships like
and the
'
the
*
Hotspur'
Taureau,' which are essentially steam-rams,
Iron-Clad Rams,
264
Chap. XII.
and which have ample ramming power with good manoeuvring power.
Among
means of obtaining increased handiness
other
in iron-clad rams, the chief
which increase a
screws,
in combination
the adoption of twin-
is
ship's
manoeuvring power
considerably, and give her special facilities for turning in a small space
—a matter of the highest moment in an
action
where many ships are crowded together.
far as
our experience goes,
it
As
appears that the single
screw has some advantage over twin-screws in point of speed attained, but
has the disadvantage of requiring
it
greater draught of water, and giving less power to turn
a ship upon her
own
centre without change of place.
For these and other reasons, desirable to give iron-clad
ships
—such
as the
own Navy, and
—
specially
the
'
'
rigged, there
is
has been considered
In these
rams twin-screws.
Rupert Belier
designed for
it
'
'
and
'
Hotspur
class in the
in our
'
French navy
ramming and but
lightly
another and most weighty reason for
adopting twin-screws,
viz. that the probability of their
being disabled through accidents to their engines
much
reduced.
These ships, as I have
capable of proceeding under as
sail alone,
said^ are
is
not
and, depending,
they do, on their steam-power for propulsion,
it
would obviously be bad policy to entrust their safety to one engine and one screw, when
it is
possible to
have
the separate engines and screws of the twin-screw plan.
Even still
if
one of the screws were disabled, the ship would
be manageable^ and could proceed at a
as is
shown by the
fair speed,
fact that twin-screw ships
often
perform the greater portion of distant voyages with only one screw working, and are then perfectly under
Ir071-0lad Rams.
Chap. XII.
control.
There can,
I think, be
265
no reasonable doubt,
therefore, that, in adopting twin-screws to the extent
they have, the Admiralty have acted wisely, in so far as the efficiency of our iron-clad
rams
concerned.
is
Handiness being secured in an iron-clad ram, the next great object of the naval architect the form and structural arrangements of for dealing a
to
adopt
best fitted
deadly blow on an enemy's side w^ithout
receiving too
itself
is
bow
damage.
serious
It
is
generally
agreed that, at least in iron-built ships, ram-bows can be efficiently strengthened, and I shall revert to the
arrangements made for this
As
chapter.
there
is
not,
to
this
the
purpose in another part of
proper form for ram-bows,
however, the same unanimity of opinion.
Some persons
are in favour of a contour of stem w^hicli
reaches forward above water, something like the kneeof-the-head ships
;
in our
wooden
and
frigates
line-of-battle
others have expressed their preference for an
upright or nearly upright ram-stem
;
but the majority
are decidedly in favour of the undcr-water ^^row, spur, or eperon, which has been adoj)ted to a greater or less
extent in the iron-clads both of our ow^n and of foreign navies.
The advocates of the overhanging, stem think that there
is
an advantage
or fore-reaching, in delivering the
blow above rather than under water; and that
ramming low-decked
height of armour belt above water, there of over-running the
enemy and making
the attacking ship aid in sinking her. that there
is
not the same
1)0W becoming
in
monitors, or ships having a small
more or
less
liability to
is
a probability
the weight of
They
also hold
danger by
tlie
"locked'' in an enemy's
side
Chap
Iron-Clad Rams.
i66
when ramming
lias
Xll.
taken place, as exists in a ship
with a projecting under-water prow.
I
shall
again
may add
refer to these opinions almost immediately, but
the reader's information that a statement of the
for
advantages claimed for the fore-reaching stem will be
found in a paper on " Naval Construction
Edward Belcher
Sir
Architects '
before the Institution
and
1868,
in
"
read by of Naval
published
since
in
their
Transactions.'
Those who advocate the upright, or nearly upright, ram-stem contend that the blow it is
not so local in
its
by the fore-reaching
is
or the eperon bow,
account the smashing or damaging side
is
sure to be increased.
thought to be more side after
be
capable of delivering
character as that delivered either
and that on
effect
this
on an enemy's
The upright bow
is
also
readily disengaged from an enemy's
ramming than
the under-water prow, and to
less liable to twisting or
The
wrenching.
latter is
the consideration to which most weight has been attached,
and
I shall, therefore, direct particular attention to it
hereafter.
Amongst
upright bow, I
those
who
are in favour of the
may mention Admiral Warden, who
expresses his preference in the Eeport on the Channel
Fleet for 1868, to which I referred above.
The
eperon^ or
spur-bow,
strictly local blow, the
to sink
is
aim kept
intended to deliver a in
view beiog rather
an enemy by penetrating the weak side below
water than to smash in or otherwise damage the strong
armoured
side
above water.
In
fact, in
form of bow with either of the others,
com^^aring this
its
great advan-
tage consists in the greater penetrating power which
undoubtedly possesses.
it
The armour of even the strongest
Iron-Clad Rams.
Chap. XII.
iron-clads does not extend
much more
267
tlian 6 feet
below
water, and below this depth the ship's safety depends
upon the comparatively weak planking, or plating of the bottom, remaining intact.
The foremost point of the pro-
jecting prow, in ships with spur-bows, 7 or 8 feet below water,
and
is
situated about
is
consequently in the best
possible position for penetrating the
weak
below
side
the armour, before meeting with much,
if
from the stronger armoured portions.
It must, then,
any, resistance
obvious that the force required in order to
kind of bow
make
effective in sinking or severely injuring
enemy will be much
than
less
is
required to
make
be
this
an
either
of the other forms equally effective, supposing such a result to for a
much
This
be possible.
ram may be speed
is
an important
so situated as to be unable to gather
before the
attack, or to avoid attacking
may
obliquely, instead of directly, but
enough
to
feature,
still
have power
break through the side below the armour,
while powerless, or almost powerless, against the ar-
moured
side.
A
large hole below water in a ship's side
must inevitably lead provisions, in the
to her
way
loss,
some
unless
special
of water-tight divisions or com-
partments in the hold, have been made
;
and
I
need
hardly say that adequate provisions have not been made in
most iron-clads, while the shock of a
collision
may
be
expected to greatly disarrange and damage any but the best arrangements of the kind.
It is not
unreasonable
to expect, therefore, that a well-executed charge
ship with a spur-bow
not
fatal,
damage
to
serious results will follow Init
moderate
force.
by a
must prove a source of great, if the ship attacked, and that very even from a blow possessed of
Iron-Clad Rams,
268
Another advantage
Chap. xii.
the spur-bow has
wliicli
is
its
extreme adaptation for damaging an enemy's rudder, Both rudder and screw are perfectly secure, or screw. in
modern
and overhang-
ships with full pink sterns
ing counters
armour, against
sheathed with
from an upright or fore-reaching stem touch of the under-water spur, which for passing in
but even a light
;
exactly adapted
is
under the counter, would
injury
suffice to disable
the finest single-screw iron-clad in the world, and place
her at the mercy of her
foe.
The other forms of ram-bow do not, I repeat, possess the foregoing advantages.
A fore-reaching stem, whether
striking amidships or abaft,
must encounter resistance
side, and the ram down upon her enemy at a inflict serious damage. The un-
from the armoured portion of the
must be moving
directly
good speed in order to armoured upper works of a ship with an armour may,
it is
true, be
swept away by a moderate blow
the loss of these will not at
and but
little
all affect
attached,
perhaps in
but
shij)'s safety,
interfere with her fighting efficiency.
over-running of an enemy, to which so is
the
;
belt
The
much importance
would certainly require a rapid attack, except the case of monitors of the American type,
with extremely low freeboard these vessels
it
;
but even in the case of
seems a much more certain means of
destruction to penetrate the thin side,
and
to trust to
the in-rush of water to sink the ship, than to rely mainly
upon the super-position of the weight of the ship upon the monitor for that purpose. The margin of buoyancy
is
so small in these ships that a leak of only
moderate amount becomes important, and the cases of the
'
Weehawken
'
and other monitors prove that a
Iroii-Clad Rams.
Chap. XII.
269
comparatively small hole in the side below water would suffice to sink
them.
Tlie
^
AVeehawken,' in spite of the
went down at her moorings in the Tecumsch was sunk by a torpedo a few minutes in about four minutes and the Patapsco is said to have sunk one minute after being struck while the efforts
made
to save her,
'
'
;
'
;
'
;
original
Monitor
'
'
went down
washing over and
in consequence of the sea
into the turrets,
junction of the turret with the
and through the These
deck.
losses,
resulting from the admission of the sea into the ship, I think, leave no doubt as to the efficacy of the spur-bow as
compared with the fore-reaching bow even when moni-
tors are the objects of attack.
stated that the
on the
I
am aware
that
it
has been
overhang of the armour and backing
sides of monitors
would prevent the spur from
reaching and striking the thin sides of the ship. can, I think, be little doubt, howe^^er, that, in
There
most cases,
by a ship with a sp'^r-bow against a monitor
a charge
would tend
to lift the
si^^
of the latter somewhat, and
thus render the penetration of the w^eak portions possible
;
and the bows of our recent ram-vessels are of
such a form as to entirely do away with this objection, as they can pierce the side of
coming will also
in contact with the
be
American
clear,
any monitor
without It
from the drawings and description of
ships given in Chapter II. (on
their customary
afloat
overhanging armour.
mode of
Armour), that
greatly reducing the thickness
of the armour at a very small depth below water, tends to render
it still
more probable that the spur-bow would
be most effective. Tlie upright, or nearly upright, bow has
supporters than
tlie
more numerous fore-reaching bow, and it has Ijcen
Iron-Clad Rams.
270
Chap. XII.
adopted in several of our iron-clads, such as the ^Achilles/ the '
'
Minotaur
Caledonia
'
'
and the converted ships of the The French also adopted it in their
class,
class.
earlier iron-clads, but, like ourselves,
have since deserted
tion will, I think,
The reasons for this deserbe regarded by the reader as amply
when he
considers the merits of the two forms.
it
in favour of the spur-how.
sufficient
The very advantage claimed non-local
character of
for the upright
blow
the
it
bow
delivers
—
— the un-
is
an attack con-
doubtedly a serious disadvantage
;
centrated upon
must, with a given
area
limited
a
for
attacking force, be more effective than one distributed
over a considerable area. that the force of the is,
for
should
side
;
whereas the spur-bow, as
injury upon a smaller area of force of the
strength of the side which resists
mously greater in the latter than it
be forgotten
blow delivered by an upright bow
The proportion of the
If
it
the most part, distributed over an area of the
armoured inflicts
Nor
much
I
have
less strength.
blow struck
it is,
said,
to the
therefore, enor-
in the former kind of bow.
be true, as I think most persons will admit, that the
neplus ultra of ramming efficiency consists in the capacity to sink
an enemy, there seems to be no good ground
maintaining the equality, the upright
bow
can be no doubt
as
much
less the superiority,
compared with the
that, if a
spur.
for
of
There
powerful iron-clad ram, with
an upright bow, came down
at a
good speed directly
upon the broadside of an enemy, she would
inflict
injury
of so terrible a character as usually to occasion the loss
of the ship attacked that a
;
but in action
ram could not ensure
it
might well happen
either a swift or a direct
charge, and on this account the form of
bow which
does
h'ou-Clad Rams.
Chap. XII.
the greatest
damage with the
271
must be con-
least force
sidered the best.
The experience
of
tlie
Americans may be referred
as proof of the efficiency of the upright
a few words on this point
of
tlieir
may
to
ram-bow, and In most
be of interest.
monitors the ram consists of a wedge-shaped
prolongation of the overhanging side armour and back-
ing beyond the hull proper, the structural arrange-
ments being made to conform as much as possible the
necessity
for
to
This was the
unusual strength.
means of making these vessels available as rams, and in them had special advantages connected readiest
with raising the anchors, &c.
;
but
it
fore be regarded as the best means,
must not thereand was not
so
regarded by the Americans themselves, who, in the '
Keokuk,'
'
Dunderberg,' and other vessels, adopted
bows approximating more or less closely to the spur That the monitors did good service is not for shape. a
moment
that
little
disputed, but
it
form of ram-bow can be
remark
necessary to
apj)lied to the present discus-
The monitor ram was
sion.
is
or nothing respecting the merits of their
upright, and
struck an
it
enemy's side on the armour close to the water-line, the
blow being distributed over a depth of far, therefore,
the conditions resembled those
been considering. this
five or six feet
we
;
But the ships which were attacked
manner, and in most cases sank, were not
to
so
liave in
be com-
pared in structural strength with most European ironclads
;
and from the
effect
produced upon them
ram of any form whatever it anything respecting the damage
is
impossible to
that
b}'
a
infer
would be done
to
.
Iron- Clad
272 such '
as
sliips
the
One
Hercules.'
'
Rams
Minotaur,'
Ch a p. x 1 1
.
'
Bellerophon,'
and
point appears clear, however, from the
by ramming, viz. that in many cases the hulls were so weakly built as to be made to leak seriously by the vibration caused by the reports of the losses of ships
shock, even
when
the parts struck were not penetrated,
We
nor seriously injured.
know
that in some of the
monitors themselves the strains of a coasting voyage
were it
sufficient to cause leaks of
requires no argument to
themselves, and
moving
great magnitude, and
show
at such
that ships thus
weak
low speeds, could not
have been formidable as rams against any but hastily constructed ships like those of the Confederates.
need only add that the
latter in
many
I
of their rams
adopted the under- water prow, but so imperfectly were these vessels constructed and strengthened, their hurried building
by their damages
builders,
owing
to
and the limited means possessed
that
they often sustained
in inflicting injury on an
enemy.
serious
The Merri*
mac,' for example, with a wrought-iron or metal cleaver
upon her bow, did good execution among the Federal fleet
at
Hampton Eoads, but was
at length obliged to
retire
on account of the injury sustained by the ram-
bow.
On
the whole, then, I do not think
American
experience can be regarded as affording any evidence of the merits of any form of bow.
Having
contrasted the merits of the spur-bow with
those of the other two forms, I pass on to notice the
disadvantages which have been said to be connected
with this form.
The
chief of these assumed disadvan-
tages consists in the difficulty that would be experi-
Ir07i-Clad Ravis.
Chap. XII.
273
enced in disengaging a spur-bow after ramming an
enemy, and
danger that would
tlie
being twisted or wrenched
exist of such a
bow
Both of these points
off.
have been brought very prominently forward by the opponents of this bow, and have been considered by
some
sufficiently
weighty
shall therefore attempt to
to justify its rejection.
show how
far these opinions
With
are justified by the few facts in our possession. respect to -the difficulty of disengaging this
an enemy's
side, I
may remark
formation extends, no
bow from
that, so far as
my
such difficulty has ever
experienced in actual warfare
in-
been
in fact, judging from
;
the action at Lissa, this difficulty does not exist. '
I
Ferdinand Max,' which has a bow of
The
this form, sus-
tained no serious injury from the effect of her four collisions,
one of which had caused the
d' Italia,'
which went down
so rapidly as to test
thoroughly the capacity of the self
from the sinking
loss of the
ship.
ram It
is,
'
Ee
most
to disengage her-
of course, within
the bounds of probability to suppose that a ship
may
by some extraordinary combination of circumstances become locked to the vessel she has rammed, and be endangered l)elieving
that,
;
but experience warrants us rather in
when an
iron-clad
ram
is
properly
handled, her engines being reversed as soon as the blow lias
been delivered, no
difficulty will
be experienced in
clearing the sinking ship.
Next, as to the danger of injury to a spiu'-bow by twisting or wrenching taking place. sider such
Those who con-
danger probable have supported their opinion
by reference
to the loss of the
unarmonrcd wood sloop
Iron-Clad Rafus.
274 *
Amazon,' which sank
after
the merchant steam-ship
coming
Osprey
^
In order to do
into collision
no bearing on the
must
this, I
with
—an example which,
'
I shall proceed to show, has really
matter.
Chap. XII.
respecting the 'Amazon,' and this
is
state a
few
facts
the more needed
as statements of a most mistaken character have been
repeatedly put forward as the bases of arguments on the
proper forms of ram-bows. similar in
its
This ship had a stem very
contour to that adopted in our iron-clads of
recent date, but without any actual point or spur, being
merely curved like a swan's
any way connected with an
This form was not in
breast.
intention to use the ship as a
The
ram, nor was such an idea ever entertained. file
of the stem was really adopted because
pro-
favoured
it
the use of fine horizontal sections, or water-lines, in
combination with U-shaped transverse sections at the
bow, by which combination the fineness of form requisite for
good speed was associated with the amount of
buoyancy required to render the 'scending motions
The
easy.
ship's pitching
and
of the
de-
intentions
signers in both these respects were
more than
realised
in the actual performance of the ship, but as the idea
of employing her as a
ram was,
specially strengthen the bow,
wood I
have
said,
same way
as
it
my
would have been in another
possession the
upon the authority of which directing the
ramming
original I
One
;
in fact,
memorandum
designed this vessel,
adoption of the form
purposes.
to
which was constructed
ship with the ordinary contour of stem
have in
never
no means whatever were employed
entertained,
just in the
as I
of bow,
not for
other fact requires to be- men-
Iron-Clad Ravis,
Chap. XII.
275
order to prevent the projecting
tioned, viz. that, in
wood prow from being chafed by the cables when the ship was riding at anchor, it was thought desirable to put on a thin metal casing on the front of the wood This casing, I need hardly say, added nothing
stem.
bow.
to the strength of the It is
on the
loss of a small lightly-built sloop of this
nor strengthened —neither poses —by the twisting of her
kind
for
built
ramming purand the
light false stem,
opening of her bow planks through
moving
iron vessel (said to
collision
bows
across her
at a
with an
good speed
be 9 or 10 knots per hour), that the very
decided condemnations of the spur-bow to which I have
On
referred have been based.
however,
it
the face of the matter,
must appear that
it
is
absurd to argue
Amazon's case to that of a bow built for ramming, and to consider that case as more conclusive of the merits of the spur-bow than the experience had from the
'
*
with the real ram-vessel accidental
collision,
but
Ferdinand Max,' not in an
*
in
There
warfare.
actual
can be absolutely no sort of comparison made between the strength of ram-bows like the *
Bellerophon's,' or the
of a small
stems
may
wood
sloop,
'
'
Lord Clyde's and the '
and the weak bow
Hotspur's,'
even though the contours of
be somewhat similar.
That
this is so will be
evident even to the non-professional reader to tlie
accompanying drawings, which show
the same scale, of the
bow
ram-bows of the three ships are needed It is ill
of the just
'
tlie
if lie refers
sections,
Amazon
named.
on
'
and the
No
remarks
to give additional force to the comparison.
only necessary to observe
blaclv are o^ soVul iron.
tliat
the parts
shown
276
Iron-Clad Rams,
StF/J of
STEm
Chap. XII.
J^IVI/120M^
orV/orsPi//?'
—
'
Iron-Clad Rams.
Chap. XI I.
No
doubt
it is
the fact that the
^
277
Amazon
had the
'
swan-shaped contour of stem given to her for the reasons assigned above which has misled
and particularly those foreign writers the
ferred to
who
is
and the associated
bow
"
:
Admiral
sul)ject.
known
so well
says of the
sciences,
The most remarkable part
same form
" frigates,
example,
Paris, for
as a writer on naval architecture
" bow, which, although the vessel " the
many critics, who have re-
'
Amazon's
of this ship is
unarmed,
is
the of
as that adopted in the English iron-clad
and projects forward under water
"
is
like the
prow of the Bellerophon,' and is doubtless intended ramming ships of equal size with the Amazon.' "* The assumption here made is, I need hardly say, an altogether mistaken one, as is also another which the same writer makes soon after, that " the iron-clads have ^
" for
'
" not stronger
prows (than the
Amazon '),
'
" are placed below their armour, *'
similarly constructed
whether there
or
is
is
not
To compare the Amazon's bow with the Lord Clyde's is not more reasonable than to compare
" armour." '
since they
and consequently are
'
'
'
a walking-cane witli
pike of one of Cromwell's
the
Ironsides.
A
still
more striking instance of the mistakes made
Amazon's bow is found in the Report, on " Munitions of War," of the United States' Commis-
respecting the
'
'
sioners at the Paris Exhibition in 1867.
the " a *
'
Amazon,' they say f
moment consider '
:
—
"
Speaking of
Here, en passant^
Paris,
Sec page 134.
t See page
240
ot"
the
us for
the loss of this vessel in connection
L'Art naval ^ TExposition universelle dc Paris en 1807/
I'ertrand.
let
ricix)rt.
Luiiclon, E.
&
F. N. Spou, ISGb.
Arthus
Iron-Clad Rams.
278
Chap. XII
ram principle of attack. Tlie was a wooden ship, but she was
" with the
'
Amazon,'
it
with a
*'
is
'^
projecting prow, armed with a strong cleaver of cast
true,
fitted
" brass for the purpose of being used as a rani if occasion ^'
required J^
If she was, comparatively speaking, a small
" ship of war, the vessel she ran into
was only a small coasting steamer of less than half her tonnage. Hence " it is reasonable to conclude that the projecting prow *^ Osprey' of the 'Amazon' was as formidable to the ''
*
" as that of the
'
Bellerophon
*•
tonomoh,' and that
"
weight of the
" built
ship,
it
would be
'
to the
'
Mian-
would, in proportion to the
be as strong as the prows of iron-
and iron-plated ships generally." After the brief
statement of the real facts of the case given previously, I
feel
sure that no further remarks are necessary in
order to
demonstrate
the
errors
of description
deduction contained in this quotation
;
and
but I cannot
forbear noticing the ingenuity which converts the thin
metal casing, which protected the wood stem from the chafing of the cables, into " a strong cleaver of cast " brass,"
and the bold assertion that the ship was intended to be " used as a ram if occasion required." Such remarks
are,
however, beneath further notice,
having absolutely no relation
to the practical construc-
tion of iron-clad rams.
Not only have foreign writers
fallen into these mis-
takes, but there are a few English naval officers
shipbuilders loss
of the
projecting
who have Amazon
also joined in the belief that the
'
prow
for
and
'
finally settles the merits of the
ramming The
;
italics are
and the phrase " Amazon
mine.
Chap. XI I.
*'
Iroii-Clad Ranis.
279
fashion" has been employed more than once to give
full
expression to
tlie
probable effect of a collision npon
ram-bows of our recent
the strengthened
iron-clads.
All such opinions obviously rest on fundamental misconceptions with respect to the purposes intended to be
served by the
Amazon,' and the construction of her
'
bow, and require no answer additional to that given
While maintaining,
above. '
Amazon's
loss does
'
as I
not render
that a similar accident
have done, that the it
in the least likely
would happen
to
an iron-clad
ram with a spur-bow, I admit most freely that, if a ram attacks a ship which is moving ahead at a good speed, there will be some danger of the ram-bow becoming twisted. It is also evident that in a prow which projects forward under water
siderable distance, the liability to twisting especially
very
when
this contour of
extent, nor
is
is
is
increased,
associated w'ith
In our iron-clads, however, the
fine w^ater-lines.
prow does not
stem
very con-
for a
project to anything like a dangerous
there such fineness of form as to prevent
a proper amount of lateral strength being given to the
When
bow.
ships are
engaged
in a
general action,
they are nearly sure to be moving at only moderate speeds,
and on that account
bow
rendered less; in
is
also the
fact,
danger to the ram-
with proper care there
seems no reason to suppose that the danger considerable.
Max'
is
At
said to
Lissa,
on one occasion, the
have struck a ship
at
*
is
at all
Ferdinand
an angle of nearly
50 degrees in consequence of the attempt made by the
enemy
the charge
to avoid
serious injuries
were
satisfactory result
was
;
inflicted
but, as I
have
said,
on the ram-bow.
no
This
no doubt due to the great care
o
.
Iron- Clad Rams.
28
Chap,
x
i I
taken on board the Austrian vessels throughout the
engagement
to put the
hehn
in such a position at the
moment of striking an enemy the ram from turning to port
as
wrenching or twisting her bow.
This simple precau-
would
tion
men under had
not, I
shows
by any naval
sure, be overlooked
it
to be
amply
sufficient.
other point in connection with the spur-bow
demands brief which
starboard and
similar circumstances, while the experience
at Lissa
One
am
would prevent
or
it
notice, viz. the
causes,
now
bow-wave
notorious
and which some persons consider
so prejudicial to a ship's steaming capability,
and
to
be
to the
power of fighting her bow guns, to do away with this form of
best adapted for
ramming.
It is the great stress laid
upon these points which has subject,
is
spur-bows,
serious falHng-off in
as far as
ramming
it
may
trials
made with
be asserted that no
performance has been caused by
When
the bow-wave.
mention the
independent of
quite
bow
view of the steam
that, in
ships having
to
I shall therefore content myself
concerned.
with stating
me
led
for obviously they are
the merits or demerits of the
only
as to make it desirable bow even if it were the
a ship
is
steaming at great
speed against a head-sea, the bow- wave may, no doubt, at times, render
chase guns in
it difficult
bow
or even impossible to fight
batteries
on the main deck, but the
upper-deck guns would never be similarly
moderate speeds in rough water, or at
smooth water, the bow-wave
is
not at
affected.
full
At
speeds in
all likely to
reach
such a height as to interfere with the working of the
main-deck guns, and as general actions are sure to be fougbt at low speeds, there
is
no reason
to anticipate
'
Iroii-Clad Rams.
Chap. XII.
281
that the fighting efficiency of ships with spur-bows will
be at seas,
all
swamped
be
by the wave
affected
In heavy
bow.
at the
with any form of stem, main-deck bow-guns will if
the ports are kept open, but under such
circumstances the form of the stem has but
little effect.
These remarks on the proper form for ram-bows have unavoidably run to some length
my
brief in
;
but I shall be very
statements respecting the almost equally
important subject of the pro23er modes of constructing
and strengthening such bows.
This
is
a subject
to
which great attention has been paid by both French and English shipbuilders, all of whose efforts and plans
may
be said to have, in the main, two objects
provide such longitudinal strength at the
prevent
its
first,
to
as to
deformation by being driven inwards in the
direction of the vessel's length lateral strength
as
;
second, to provide such
prevent the
to
twisted or wrenched.
bow from being
Besides these objects, there has
been kept in view% especially in iron
also
:
bow
ships,
the
adding to the ship's safety by dividing numerous watertight compartments.
desirability of
the
bow
into
Wood-built iron-clads can be made very
rams by bolting strong timbers and iron in a longitudinal direction,
upon the
proper, and thus supporting the
bow
efficient as
stra23S,
placed
inside of the hull ;
wdiile the
stem
armed with an iron or metal
in such cases is usually
" cleaver " strongly bolted to the outside of the ship.
This '
is
the kind of arrangement
shl[)s in
in
carried out
in tbc
Lord Clyde,' and some other wood our own Navy and it has been adopted also
Lord Warden,'
many
'
;
of the French iron-clads.
Frciicli vessels specially
In
fact,
all
the
intended for raunuing, such as
.
Iron- Clad Rams,
282 the
*
Belier/
'
Bonle-dogue/ and
built, tlieir efficiency as
'
c h ap.
x
1 1
Taureau/ are wood-
rams consequently depending
mainly upon the soHdity of the timbering used to strengthen the bows and the massive spurs or cleavers
Whatever degree of efficiency may be such bows by means of elaborate and
on the stems. in
attained
weighty strengthenings,
cannot be expected that
it
they will equal the ram-bows of iron-built ships, and I
show why
shall attempt to
this is so.
First of
materials and fastenings in a wood-built
such a character that some
all,
bow
amount of injury
—
the
are of as, for
instance, the starting of bolts, opening of butts of plank,
tearing of stem, &c.
—
ramming, and more or result, against which
sufficient provision.
bow
nearly sure to be caused by
is
less
it
On
is
extensive leaks will often scarcely possible to
make
the other hand, an iron-built
has a solid mass of wrought iron for a stem,
which
well backed
is
up by the armour, the
sides,
the longitudinal frames (of which the strength
is
and im-
mense), so that the only damage to be apprehended
is
that the comparatively thin side plating will be broken
through
;
but even then the space inside
by watertight
which
partitions,
is
so cut
up
also contribute to the
strength of the bow, as to render the liability to danger
from the inflow of water very small indeed.
Any
one
who
has studied the construction of the bow in such a Bellerophon * will, I am sure, agree with ship as the '
*
me
in the opinion that either the force required to
drive the
bow
in
and
to fold
up the immensely strong
* Full particulars and detailed drawings of the bow of this ship are to be found at pages 117 and 118 of my w'ork on Shipbuilding in Iron and '
Steel'
h'on-Clad Rams.
Chap. XII.
283
longitudinal girders that abut against the stem, or that
required to twist or wrench off these same girders in
manner described above, would be immense and even if a part of the bow were torn away by a collision, the ship's safety would remain almost inithe
;
that,
touched.
In such a
bow
the great principle of com-
bining lightness with strength
is
fully exemplified
for
;
wood logs and the strengthen the bow of a wood
instead of having the heavy
iron
braces required to
ship
inside the framing of the hull proper, w^e
framing of the hull
have the
made to give longitudinal and bow of the iron ship. Hence, wood ship's bow is heavier than
itself
lateral strength to the
although weaker, the
that of the iron ship, and I need hardly say that excessive weights at the extremities are very objectionable,
and
since they tend to produce both pitching
This
is
straining.
another aspect of the advantages resulting from
the use of iron for the hulls of iron-clads instead of
wood, and one which gives additional force
to
the
remarks made in Chapter lY.
The preceding summary,
brief thougli
be, will, I
it
think, convince the reader that in strength of iron-clad
rams are not
ships such as the
and
*
'
deficient,
Bellerophon,'
and that our '
Hercules,'
Rupert,' would probably stand
tlie
very
artillery,
the force spent in breaking
the projectile
is
In
so
much
lost
iron-built
Hotspur,'
shock of a
ramming,
collision
satisfoctorily.
'
bow our
as
in
up or injuring
from the amount that
the attack most effective, therefore, the
To render ram-bow must
approximate most nearly to a weapon
little
should be expended on the object of attack.
injury,
and
this condition
is
best attained
liable
to
by adopting
Iron-Clad Rams.
284
the arrangements possible
may happen armour
will
that the
recent ships, the
has been carried
is '
thin
It
plating below
the
side
no cause
Hotspur
an iron structure.
damage
some
receive
through, but this
in
Chap. XII.
'
down over
and
for anxiety
and the
'
be ;
broken
and in our
Rupert/ the armour
bow
to such a depth as
renders accidents of this kind very improbable, while
it
admits of enormous support being given to the ram-stem.
Hitherto I have almost exclusively dealt with the provisions
made
rams
it is
but
;
made
to secure offensive
power
in iron-clad
obvious that provisions also have to be
in these ships in order to render
them capable
either of avoiding the charge of another ram, or of being
but little endangered by ness it
is
it.
Under this aspect also handiall the means of securing
the great essential, and
referred to in the earlier portions of this chapter are,
as I
have
said, quite as applicable to
as they are to delivering
there can be
little
an
avoiding a charge
effective blow.
In
fact,
doubt that a ship possessing good
manoeuvring power^ and being well handled, could, as long as she kept moving at a moderate speed, at least avoid being dangerously injured by ramming.
even
But
she were struck, unless the blow were delivered
if
directly,
and
at a
built iron-clads
comparatively
very high speed, one of our iron-
would
still,
efficient,
in all probability,
remain
as the penetration of the side
and the entrance of water into the ship would not involve anything like the serious consequences which
would
result in a
the ordinary plan. ships
is
due
wood
ship, or in iron ships built
on
This superiority in our iron-built
to the fact that,
with one or two exceptions,
they have a strong longitudinal watertight skin of
Chap. XII.
Iron- Clad Rams.
iron, situated at a
few
283
feet inside the
and extending from the
ship's bilge
height above water.
fact, this
In
up
bottom
j)latiDg,
to a considerable
longitudinal jDartition,
or bulkhead, shuts in a space on each side of the ship into
which the water may enter
freely
when
the outside
broken through by a ram, but the passage of the water into the hold of the ship is rendered plating
is
impossible so long as the partition remains intact.
The
watertight space, or "wing," on each side of the ship is
that is
by numerous transverse partitions so the water which enters through a hole in the side
also subdivided
really limited to a space about 20 or 25 feet long,
and can therefore
The
be of but inconsiderable amount.
situation of the
inner
plating here referred to
(usually styled in technical language the "
heads ")
is
wing bulk-
such as to give special protection to the ship
" between w^ind and water," just
spur-shaped
where the attack of a
bow would be made. This
is
a point worth
notice, especially as there is not a corresponding pro-
vision in the iron-built ships belonging to other navies,
except in some of those built in this country, nor can there
be so satisfactory a provision in wood-built ships. this fact
which gives
special
weight
to the
made on the advantages of the water prow as applied in our ships. The direct and swift attack of an viously
It is
remarks pre-
projecting under-
iron-clad
ram on
the broadside of one of our iron-clad frigates would
undoubtedly smash in not only the outside plating but " also,
the "
wing bulkhead
have
free access to the hold.
probable,
unless
the
manageable by the
and then the water would
Such a
iron-clad
loss of
result
is
scarcely
attacked became
un-
her steering power, or was
Iron-Clad Rams,
286
charged by a much handier
prow
;
but since
ship,
with a very projecting
it is possible_, it is
Even
sider the consequences.
Chap. Xll.
if
only proper to conthe side were thus
broken through, any one of our iron-built ships would most probably remain
although her efficiency
afloat,
w^ould be considerably impaired, the water which
enter being confined to the watertight
would
compartment
of the hold, enclosed by bulkheads crossing the ship at a moderate distance before and abaft the part broken
through.
In
fact,
under these circumstances, the ship
struck would be in exactly the same condition as an
ordinary iron ship which by any accident has had the
bottom plating broken, and one of the hold-compart-
ments
filled
with water, so that
we have good
believe that her safety need not be despaired
reason to of,
unless,
by the blow being delivered at, or very near, a bulkhead, more than one compartment should be injured and filled. All iron ships can thus be protected to some extent against being sunk
own
vessels
by a
single
blow of a ram, and our
have the further and important protection
of the watertight wings just described are not similarly safe. '
Re
d' Italia
'
sufficed
One to
but
;
wood
ships
hole in the side of the
sink her
;
but this would
scarcely have been possible in an iron ship with properly
arranged Avatertight compartments. their latest iron-clads,
and have
fitted
have become alive
doubt this
in
to this danger,
transverse iron bulkheads in the holds
of wood-built ships in
No
The French,
is
order to add to their safety.
an improvement, but our experience
with wood ships leads us to have grave doubts whether these
bulkheads
can
be
made
efficient
divisions in the hold, on account of the
watertight
working that
is
Iron-Clad Rams.
Chap. XII.
to take
sure
j)l^ce
wood
a
in
287 This fact adds
hull.
another to the arguments previously advanced in favour of iron hulls for armoured ships
;
for
appears that an
it
on the system of our recent
iron-built ship^ constructed
iron-clads, is comparatively safe against destruction
a ram, imless she
is
repeatedly attacked
when
by
in a
and most
disabled state, while a wood-built ship may,
likely will, be totally lost in consequence of one well-
delivered heavy blow.
Before concluding this chapter, I desire to touch
upon the subject of the manoeuvring and working of iron-clad rams in time of action, a subject which is of special interest to the naval officer, and which really belongs to him mainly, but in which the naval briefly
and the marine engineer
architect
The
command
officer in
of a
also
have a share.
ram would undoubtedly
require to exercise his judgment as to the best speed, direction,
and place of attack upon an enemy's
ship,
and success would for the most part be de2)endent upon the correctness of his decision.
There
some points of importance which are sure notice in
or nearly
all,
attacks
all,
however,
are,
to require
by ramming, how-
ever different the circumstances attending the attacks
may
be,
and
to
some of those
it
may
be of interest to
refer.
The
first
of these matters
is
the necessity for arranging
and securing everything on board by the shock, injury.
in such a
manner
liable to
as to prevent serious
Most of our iron-clad rams
remembered, rigged, and
in
them
derangement
it
are,
it
will
be
would consequently
be proper to take precautions, such as running in the
;
Iron-Clad Rams.
288
bowsprit (which can be done in
many
securing the
spars
the
all
down
clearing the head-gear, sending
masts and as
Chap. XII.
and
ships)
the topgallant
of the upper yards as possible, and
which remain
aloft
in
the best
manner by preventer stays, &c. In the Hotspur and Rupert,' these preparations would not be required, as they are only lightly rigged, and it is possible
'
'
^
may
hardly necessary to repeat that these ships
regarded as steam action.
I
war-engines,
may mention
always
cleared
be for
in this connection, as a proof
of the necessity for these preparations in a full-rigged ship,
that
Austrian
the
which went into action
line-of-battle
ship
at Lissa without
'
Kaiser,'
having been
prepared for ramming, but which did resort to that
mode
of attack,
lost
her foremast and bowsprit in
attacking some Italian vessels. tions, it is also
Besides these prepara-
necessary to look well to the stowage
of anchors, boats, and other heavy articles on board; to train the
guns in such a manner
least liable to
being dismounted
to secure the engines
and
as to render
when
them
the shock comes
boilers against displacement
(arrangements for which are made in the original con-
and equipment of our ships) or injury by the and to take such precautions as to prevent any
struction
shock
;
temporary derangement or stoppage of the machinery being caused by the water in the boilers being forced
by the shock
into the steam passages
and cylinders.
These are a few of the principal precautions which
would have
to
made, and
may add
I
be taken in
all cases
before an attack
is
that the crew should be so j^laced
as to feel the shock as little as possible
on the deck, or swinging by
their
—
either
by lying
hands from the
— Chap. XII.
Iroii-Clad Raiiis.
beams of the deck above, and
So much
is
may
of any lieavy stores that
the preparations
for
on board the ram-
mode of
a few words will suffice respecting the
;
attack
xiiistriaiis
by the blow.
be dislodged
vessel
was done by the
as
way
to be out of tlie
289
prove most
likely to
necessary for two reasons
A
efficient.
in
first,
:
fair
speed
most cases an
attack to be most effective must be direct, and,
when
charging an enemy not disabled, a direct attack must partake somewhat of the nature of a surprise a fair speed
side
spur-bow which
a
below the armour,
to inflict great
in such cases
a low speed
;
it
second,
requisite to give proper effect to the
is
With
blow.
;
it is
damage with
strikes
an enemy's
possible, as I
have shown,
might be thought desirable
but
it
to attack at
must not be overlooked that a
attack should be the great
and
a very moderate force,
aim kept
direct
and that
in view,
a very slow rate of approach would usually militate against the attainment of this object.
On
the other
must be confessed that there is great truth in Admiral Ryder's remark,* that " any more momentum
liand,
''
it
than
" to
and
is
necessary to pierce to a vital point only tends
more it
nand
seriously injure the
bow
of the
rammer
appears from Austrian accounts that the
Max was '
*
;"
Ferdi-
when
not steaming 8 knots per hour d' Italia.'
On
this point of speed, as I said before, the officer in
com-
she delivered the blow that sunk the
mand
of the
decision
the
ram
ram
must be attacks,
is
by
\\^}\M^xi
on
Re
far the best judge,
left in his
however,
'
hands.
it is
and
At whatever
obvious
—and
ClianiK'l Fleet for 18()8, pa?;e V^.
its
speed
tlie exjierl-
Chap. XII.
Iron-Clad Rams.
290 dice of Lissa shows
to be true
it
—that the engines should
be kept going up to a very short time before the blow is
delivered, but that at the time of striking they should
be stopped
;
while they should be reversed directly
enemy
after striking an
in order to disengage the ram-
Reference has previously been made also to the
bow.
care required
at
the
helm
ship's
impact, in order to prevent the
moment
at the
bow from
of
being twisted
or wrenched violently, and this constitutes the only
other feature of importance to which I shall here
draw
attention.
Up
to the present time our experience
but limited, but this clad ships of the
is
European
engaged
is
all iron-
types, the action at Lissa
forming the only reliable evidence fighting
with rams
almost equally true of
we have
of both the
and ramming powers of these ships w^hen
Whether or not ramming power will eventually take rank before armament in our iron-clads it is impossible to foretell. Yery decided in a general action.
opinions have been
expressed on both sides of this
question, but a series of real
equipped and proper solution
—which
efficient ;
and
engagements between well
iron-clads
can alone afford a
in the absence of such a solution
no one can desire
—we
cannot,
think, do
I
better than perpetuate the policy that has guided the
Admiralty thus
If so, the greater
far.
ships will remain well
ramming power, so less number will be ciency
and
'
is
armed fighting
to speak, as built in
number
of our
ships possessing
an auxiliary
;
and a
which the ramming
the main feature, but which, like the
'
effi-
Hotspur
Rupert,' will be armed also with a small
'
number
Iro7i-Clad Rams.
Chap. XII.
of very heavy guns.
be asserted
tliat
clads are the
Even now,
some of onr
291
it
may
with
jus^tice
iron-bnilt broadside iron-
most formidable ram-ships
and
afloat,
there need be no fear that our specially constructed
rams
will require to avoid the presence of
vessels of the kind
any
either building or built.
remains to be learnt, no doubt, on this subject, and
improvements
may
;
for the
present,
is
assured that in
say the
more than equal
navy
in the world.
many
added to by any
however, we
ramming power our
least,
AIucli
be made in the course of a few
years, especially if our experience
naval war
otlier
may
iron-clad fleet
to that of
rest is,
to
any other
1
29
c h a p. x 1 1
Con version of Wooden
-
CHAPTER
XIII.
CONVEKSION OF WOODEX LINE-OF-BATTLE SHIPS INTO IRON-CLADS.
When
Navy was commenced
the reconstruction of our
about ten years ago on the introduction of armourplating, our
very
wooden steam
efficient
battle ships
and
state,
had been brought
fleet
to a
in all the dockyards line-of-
and frigates of the most improved type
The Admiralty,
were in process of construction.
re-
cognising the importance of quickly creating a considerable iron-clad fleet, ordered that line-of-battle ships,
frigates.
we have the name
to
the
of ship
class
Caledonia
'
which
class in the
Flandre
'
classes in
the French
As I
the result
have given
preceding chapters,
and which can well compare with the '
of the
then building, should be modified
(md converted into iron-clad '
several
'
Gloire
navy.
and
'
Having
in
various parts of the preceding chapters had occasion to refer to the construction ships, I
and performances of these
need add nothing here beyond the statement
that, considering the exigencies of the time
when they
were produced, and the great success which has attended tlieir
conversion, there can be no doubt that the course
adopted was, on the whole, the
But though the partly thus, with a
best.
built line-of-battle ships
few exceptions, economically
iron-clads, the large
number of
were
utilised as
line-of-battle ships
com-
Chap. XIII.
Linc-of-Battle Ships into Iron-Clads.
293
economy be similarly class were considerably
pleted and afloat could not with
The
treated.
Caledonia'
'
lengthened and otherwise altered from their original designs
two-deckers,
as
besides
having their upper
decks omitted, and being thus turned
into
Similar changes would have been very costly
frigates. if
carried
out in ships that had already been completely built and finished.
Hence
arose the question.
Would
not be
it
wooden
advisable to devise some scheme by which the
steam
ships,
having their machinery on board, could be
turned into iron-clads
matter
it
Of
?
course,
on the face of the
was evident that such a conversion could be
made by removing more
or less of the top weight of
these ships, reducing their height out of the water, and
putting the weight thus
saved into armour for the
whole or part of the exposed portions of the hull that
Such conversions might be carried out
would remain.
accordance with
in
either
systems of armament
the
in fact,
;
examples of both methods, the
broadside
we have '
Zealous
or
in our '
turret
Navy
having been
converted as she stood into a broadside iron-clad, and the
'
lloyal Sovereign
'
being a converted turret-ship.
Either of these conversions could be repeated, of course, in other line-of-battle ships, that, if a
ships
it
is
highly probable
prolonged w^ar should occur,
many
of these
would be razeed and plated with a few strakes
of armour.
It
turret
armament
drawn
to
it is
and
is,
however, in connection wnth the
that public opinion has mostly been
schemes for conversion, since that system can,
supposed, be well associated with extremely low IVcc-
bonrd; and most of these schemes have been iiiteudcd to
produce
a
class of vessels specially
fittcMl
for coast
;
Conversio7i
294
In the following remarks, therefore,
defence.
most
for the
Chap. Xlll.
of Woode7i
])art
I shall
confine attention to the feasibility
and propriety of turning our line-of-battle ships into monitors but it must be clearly understood that these ships could, if it were thought fit, be turned into broadside iron-clads, and that most of the arguments advanced ;
will apply with equal force to both classes of converted ships.
The Eoyal '
Sovereign,' to which I have just referred,
Avas originally a three-decked line-of-battle ship, but in
1802 was cut down to a height of about 7
above
feet
the water, her upper, main, and middle decks being
removed, and the weights thus saved, together with those due to the very large reductions sails,
anchors,
cables,
were replaced by the dec!:, and tliG turrets.
coals,
made
in masts,
and general equipment,
side armour, the plating
on the
This conversion, allowing 12^
per cent, on actual expenditure for incidental charges, cost about 150,000/. in addition to the first cost of the vessel,
and
as the result a ship
while valuable for coast defence, thing but Channel service.
was obtained which, not
is
In this
fitted for
shi23,
Captain Coles' system of turrets received it
may
its first trial
much
greater than
it
would have been
work had not been of an unusual character but wisdom of repeating such an experiment may well
the
the
true,
is
therefore be proper to assume that the cost of
conversion was if
it
any-
;
be doubted
when
for
would be possible plated Avater,
very
little, if
any, more expense
it
new armourdrawing much less
to construct, of iron, a
monitor, better defended,
and more durable and
efficient in
This view^ of the matter leads
me
every respect.
to refer
more
fully
Line-of-Battle Ships into Iron-Clads.
Chap. XIII.
to
295
some of the reasons which have hitherto prevented
the carrying out of any general scheme for converting
our wooden Hne-of-battle have,
is
it
true, a considerable
which could be thus arise,
doubtless
asked.
treated,
many would
inexpensive methods
number of such and
if
Whether the money
ships,
necessity should
be converted by ready and
but the question
;
We
ships into iron-clads.
may
well be
that would be required for
such conversions could not be better spent, especially at a time like the present,
imperative or pressing?
money
when saving of time is not My own opinion is that our
could be and has been better employed, and I
shall almost
immediately show why I hold this opinion.
Before doing
so,
however, I
may remark
that
the
capability of our old line-of-battle ships for rapid con-
version into either armoured broadside ships or monitors
has been fully recognised by the Constructive Depart-
ment of the Admiralty, and detailed designs have been prepared which would enable the conversions to be immediately carried out
if
there should ever be a great
and sudden demand for such the officers of the Admiralty it
vessels.
to
make
It
is
only due to
this statement, as
has frequently been assumed, and stated, that they
were entirely oj^posed
may add
to
any scheme of conversion.
I
that the experience obtained with the hastily
built and improvised iron-clads used by the Confederates
during the late war shows the importance which, under
some circumstances, might attach to the possession by this country of a wooden steam fleet, and of tlie resources in public
and private ironworks and dockyards wliich
would enable us
to turn
very short time.
If
it
into a fleet of iron-('lads in a
need were, the Channel
might
;'
296
of Wooden
Co7iversion
Chap. XIII.
within a brief space be held, and every Enghsh port of
importance be defended, by ships beside which the much-talked-of Merrimac,' ^
'•
Atalanta,' and
*
Tennessee
would appear contemptible, and which would be stronger in both offensive all,
and defensive powers than most,
if
not
of the American monitors.
Reverting, however, to the reasons fleet
why our armoured
has not yet been thus developed,
observe that there are
expending large sums of
it is
necessary to
many strong reasons for not money upon the conversion of
our wooden line-of-battle ships in a period of peace, and
when no
war exists. In the first 23lace, the development of our wooden steam fleet was so sudden that many of our line-of-battle sliips were built with timber not thoroughly seasoned, and decay has consequently been more rapid in them than is usual in wood ships. Again, it must be remembered tliat
prospect of naval
even the newest of these ships are now eight or
ten years old, and
many of them
so that their condition factory.
is
are considerably older
on that account the
less satis-
If these ships were taken in
version, therefore, extensive rejoairs
hand for conwould be required
and it would be necessary to greatly renew and strengthen them in order to adapt them for armour.
in the hulls,
But, supposing for the
moment
that the hulls did not
require to be repaired and strengthened, and were likely to last a reasonable time after conversion, there still
remain the extremely important
weights of these wooden hulls are
fact
much
would
that
the
greater than
those of iron hulls, and that the weight of armour they
would carry would be consequently much smaller than could be carried by iron-built ships.
It
may
be well to
— Chap. XIII.
Linc-of-Dattle Ships into Iron-Clads.
297
take the cases of a few ships in order to illustrate this
In the converted broadside ship
fact.
weighing 3067 tons possible its
carries only
own weight)
iron-built broadside ship
2675
tons
'Zealous'
—nearly
Zealous,' a hull
3055 tons
kinds
all '
than
less
had the
Zealous
system as the
'
Zealous.'
'
ships
-
feature
this
In the
even more striking, as
is
show Weight
:
of Hull.
Weights Carried.
Tons.
Tons.
JRoyal Sovereign (converted ship)
3243
1837
Glutton (breastwork monitor)
2200*
2975
Tliunderer
3272*
5700
This comparison need not be dwelt upon
speak for themselves. ever, that the
It is
;
the figures
but jDroper to state, how-
Royal Sovereign
'
was the
first
and only
ship so converted, and that the superiority of the ships type.
due
is
to
On
some extent the
to the
new
result of the difference of
the other hand, this superiority
is
mainly
employed being iron instead of
to the material
wood, and
In
armour from
sufficed to increase the
the following comparison will
*
the
been built of iron on the same
present thickness of 4^ inches to 6 inches.
turret
of
Audacious,' the weight saved on the
would have
hull its
'
that
tons of armour, &c., or nearly
200 tons more than are carried in the fact,
new
while in the
;
Audacious,' a hull weighing
400 tons
— carries 3224 '
(as nearly as
of armour, armament, engines,
and equipment of
coals,
'
system adopted in the construction of
the recent ships. *
Including very
breastwork.
stronij;
The Glatton' '
defensive deck plating, and is
plutin;j;
taken at her lii'htins draught.
un
top of
Conversion of Wooden
298 Besides
this, it
must be remembered that these
of-battle ships are
(in
Chap. XI 1 1.
line-
comparatively slow, and have engines
most cases more or
less
worn) which are
deficient of
modern appliances for reducing coal consumption, so that they would need to carry larger supplies of coal than ships with new engines, which is another reason for concluding that their armour must be thinner than that of a
new
ship.
Finally, these ships
have a
all
considerable draft of water, and on that account are less fitted for coast
For
all
defence than shallower ships would be.
think
these reasons, therefore, I
must be
it
admitted that the Admiralty have acted wisely in re-
sums on the conversion
fraining from expending large
To sum
of our line-of-battle ships.
doubtedly more or
less
up, they are un-
decayed and weak
;
are
of
deeper draught than they should be for 'coast defence are slow, and have comparatively wasteful engines
;
;
and
could not carry nearly so great a weight or thickness of
armour
as
new
iron ships, the
mere
which can
hulls of
be very cheaply and quickly built by the great private firms of the country.
These are reasons for the comprehension of which no
amount of technical knowledge is required there are others which are no less weighty, but more technical, The chief of these is the to which I shall briefly refer. ;
probable behaviour at sea of these ships into monitors
;
for,
if
converted
although not sea-going ships in the
usual sense of the term, such vessels ought to be capable
of keeping in the Channel under most circumstances of
wind and weather. treating of rolling that,
when
It is
—
as I
—natural
at
have before said when first
sight to suppose
the lofty sides of a line-of-battle ship are cut
Liiie-of-Battlc Ships into h'oii-Clads.
Chap. XIII.
down and
the top-weiglits removed,
converted sLip
be steadier than the line-of-battle ship
sliould
have shown that this reverse
is
not
is
to be expected.
to the fact that a
great
tlie
wood
so,
likely to roll
have
I
;
but I
that, in general, the
also called attention
ship with her
weights of engines,
much more
and
299
boilers,
heavy
&c.,
hull,
and
low down,
is
heavily than an iron ship with
the improved structural arrangements introduced into
Navy.
ships of the
the iron-clad
In the converted
must be expected that the rolling would be considerable, and the only good means of reducing ships, then,
the rolling
it
somewhat would be the carrying out of the
breastwork monitor system in combination with a low free-board, as has
been provided for in the designs for
converting these ships prepared at the Admiralty.
It
would of course be true that the waves would wash over the decks of these converted monitors, and that the
tendency to checked
;
roll
would on
this
account be somewhat
but in any but breastwork monitors this would
also cause inability
to fight the turret-guns.
considerations render
it
These
more apparent that the
still
conversion would not place very satisfactory ships at the service of the country.
So
far I
have dealt
chiefly with the proposals for
turning our line-of-battle ships into coast defence vessels, or monitors which would
not be rigged so as to be
capable of proceeding under
resemble in this respect the 'Prince Albert.' for converting
'
sail,
but would closely
Eoyal Sovereign and the '
Proposals have, however, been
them
lowness of free-board
into sea-going monitors, in is
retained,
made which
but associated with
the masts and sails of a fall-rigged ship.
All that has
Conversion of Wooden
300
been said previously
(excej)t the
Chap. Xill.
remarks relating to
clraiiglit
of water) applies to these proposals also
there are
many
special objections to the latter class
I consider it desirable to indicate, as the
declining to entertain
strictures for
kind.
but
which
Admiralty and
have been subjected
their professional officers
;
to
some
proposals of the
In an Appendix at the end of
this
volume, I
have considered theoretically the question of " The Stability of Monitors
under Canvas," and have pointed
out some of the dangers to which such vessels are I
liable.
need only say here, therefore, that the chief of these
dangers consists in the risk of overturning, or upsetting,
which
results
from the
fact that in a
monitor a mode-
rate inclination puts a portion of the lee-side of the deck
under water, and that the especially in
danger
is
other than
at its greatest
stability is thus diminished,
breastwork monitors.
when
the actual amount of heel
by the
is
the ship
will,
think,
I
at sea,
when
often virtually increased
slope of the wave-surface.
tom danger
is
This
That
be seen by
this all
is
no phan-
my
readers
from the preceding brief statement, but the reality of the danger will j)erhaps be best understood by naval officers
and naval
Leaving
this
architects.
most serious feature out of consideration
for the present, there are,
of importance which, in
however, several other points
my estimation, render
the plans
unsuited for practical application.
For example, a seagoing full-rigged ship requires a large complement of men, a great weiglit of stores and equipment, and a good coal supply.
posal yet
Now
made
I
venture to assert that in no pro-
for converting the line-of-battle ships
into sea-going iron-clads has adequate provision been
— Linc-of-Battlc Ships into Iron-Clads.
Chap. XIII.
made
in these respects, in association
thickness of armour.
At
the present time
without doubt, be worse than
armoured ship
for
with a
folly
sufficient it
would,
an
construct
to
sea -going
general
301
purposes that
should not have a reasonable prospect of being able to
meet
at least
most of the existing iron-clads on equal
terms as regards defensive armour; and
if
armour of
the thickness required for this purpose be carried on a
converted ship, she cannot carry besides the weights of coal, stores,
and equipment necessary
in a full-rigged
nor provide proper accommodation for her nume-
ship,
On
rous crew.
paper
these requirements
;
may
it
be possible to meet
in j^ractice
it is
impossible.
all
Of the
plans that have been put forward for the purpose,
may
without exception be said that they
sufficient
weights and
Kspace
—
all fail to
it
allow
in other words, far too
much has been attempted to be done on the dimensions. As an example of this, I may mention that on one occasion the Secretary of the in
Parliament
that,
Admiralty
stated in his place
had one of these schemes
for con-
version been carried out, instead of having a free-board of between 3 and 4 feet, as was estimated, the upper
decks
of
some ships would have been only a few
inches above water,
when
be carried were on board.
all
the weights intended to
The
result of careful exa-
mination of such schemes and of calculations connected
with them
None
may
be briefly
summed up
as follows
:
of our screw line-of-battle shi^^s can be converted
into efficient sea-going iron-clad monitors,
having the
necessary sail-jiower and the crews required to work
them under
sail,
together with the weights of stores and
equipment required
in a full-rigged ship.
They may
Conversion of Wooden
302
Chap. xiii.
be converted as partially-armoured broadside ships like the
*
Zealous' and 'Eepulse;' or,
by giving up masts,
and a large weight of equipment, such have said, be turned into formidable coast-
spars, sea-stores,
ships can, as I
defence monitors
;
but even such conversions would not
be justifiable except in the emergencies of a war. Before concluding this chapter I
may
observe that
the question of the pohcy of carrying out these con-
versions has been often argued from false premises.
Statements have repeatedly been made respecting the loss to the nation
involved in the non-conversion of
the line-of-battle ships, which are not only mistaken
but positively absurd. a
money value
little
We short
hear of ships representing of
10,000,000/. lying in
harbour and rotting, when they might, by the expenditure of a moderate sum, be converted into useful ironclads. The truth is, however, that a considerable number of those ships have been in service, and that, although many of them have not been completed, they have really constituted a reserve force that would have been drawn upon if occasion had arisen. The transition from wood to iron-clad war-ships has undoubtedly
been rapid, and the Admiralty acted wisely in
pending the construction of wooden
and clads
that
frigates
when
wooden
line-of-battle ships
expediency of building iron-
the
became apparent
sus-
;
but the action at Lissa shows
ships are far from ineffective in engage-
ments where iron-clads are present, and there can be little
doubt that the value of such ships as a reserve
would be very
great, since the
first
iron-clad
action
would greatly cripple the armoured ships of the enemy, and give scope
for the operations of the
wooden
fleet.
Linc-of-Battle Ships into Iron-Clads.
Chap. XIII.
For these reasons, then,
wrong assumption that steam
fleet
is
of this country
I
hold that
in
it
is
is
a very
made when the wooden is
powerless for purposes of war,
up
it
303
down as virtually and the money locked
put
represented as being w^orse than useless.
To convert the
line-of-battle shij^s into iron-clads
be to incur considerable expense, as
doubt by the case of the
*
is
would
proved beyond
Eoyal Sovereign;' and the
would be produced would undoubtedly durable and efficient for coast defence than the
class of ship that
be
less
new monitors which the
same money.*
could be built of iron for about
In war time the rapidity with
which these ships might be converted into iron-clads
would probably outweigh these considerations, important though they be, although it may fairly be questioned whether even this
advantage would exist in
presence of our enormous resources for building quickly in
In time
iron.
urgency, and devote
it
of peace
there
is
would certainly be
not the false
same
policy
to
any considerable part of the sums annually
voted for the construction of iron-built iron-clads to the production of such inferior and short-lived ships as the converted vessels must undoubtedly prove.
* We have seen that the conversion of the 'Royal Sovereign's' hull, with 500 tons of armour, cost about 150,000?., whereas the contract price of the liull of the iron-huilt Cerberus,' with G70 tons of armour, is but 99,000/., ami the estimated cost of the hull of the powerful monitor Glatton,' with no less than 1005 tons of armour is (including 12] per cent, for establishment expenses) '
'
butlG3,00C'.
;
APPENDIX. ON THE STABILITY OF MONITORS UNDER CANVAS. lie id
at
Session of the Institution of Naval Architects, 1868, the Bev. Joseph Woolley, LL.D., F.E.A.S.,
Xintli
the
April ith,
Vice-President, in the Chair.
The
proposal to mast monitors and to send tliem to sea as fnllrigoed sailing ships has been so often made, and urged upon the
even by persons claiming to speak with weight upon questions of naval construction, that I have deemed it desirable to lay before the members and friends of public with so
much
this Institution a
zeal,
few considerations which
some of the same time
will exhibit
the dangers of such a course, and which will at
present a few examples of what are certainly very interesting and exceptional cases of stability." Permit me, at the outset, to say that I employ the term stability in the sense in which it has hitherto been used in '^
scientific
the
'
orks upon naval architecture.
^^
the word
is
often
employed
as
In nautical parlance
the synonym of steadiness
Achilles,' for instance, being in this
way pronounced the
most " stable " ironclad in the Channel Squadron. ever,
is
for, in
not at all the scientific sense of the
that sense, the
'
Achilles
'
is (for
This,
term
how-
stability;
her size) the least stable
owes her superior steadiness to the very circumstance of her stability being so small. The Bellerophon,' which is, I believe, next to the of the
iron-clads,
arid,
in
point of
fact,
*
'
Achilles' in steadiness,
her
stability,
while the
*
is
next to her also in the smallness of
Lord Clyde
'
and other ships of much
larger stability are correspondingly deficient in the quality of It is to be regretted that this discrepancy
steadiness.
between the the fact of
its
exists
and the nautical use of the term but existence should incite both Rranien and naval
scientific
;
X
— ;
3o6
On
the Stability
architects to cultivate a
of Monitors under Canvas.
App.
mutual understanding of both uses of
the word.
In
architecture
naval
— forgive
me
for
detaining
you a
moment while I reiterate an elementary fact or two which may help this mutual understanding the word stability is applied to the effort which a ship makes, when inclined, to
—
return to the upright position.
she has great stability stability;
and
the
fact
hibits the cause of the
that a ship w^hich position in
still
We
if
to
If she
slow
is
urgent to return to
return,
— —
be chiefly observed
move
it,
has small
she
discrepancy in question
reluctant to
is
to
for
is
it
ex-
this, viz.
out of the upright
and urgent to return to it, is usually obey the fluctuations and impulses of
water,
the most urgent to waves.
;
naval architects say such a ship
is
too stable
seamen say she is not stable enough; and I must say that our use of the word is a mere fair-weather use of it, and that we must forgive naval officers if they laugh at us for pronouncing a ship stable in proportion as she rolls about in waves at sea. it is too Still, our use of the word is a perfectly legitimate one firmly built into our scientific terminology to be removed, and all we can do is to endeavour to make it as well and widely ;
understood as possible. Strictly speaking, stability, in our sense, statical
and dynamical.
Permit
me
to
is
of two kinds
explain both briefly.
Fig. 1 represents the section of a ship heeled over to a certain
angle
;
G
is
the position of the centre of gravity of the ship
;
C
— On
App.
and
B
the Stability
of Monitors under Canvas. 307
are the centres of buo3"ancy in the upright and inclined
M
B is a vertical line along which the buoyancy of the ship acts upwards G W, a vertical line along which the weight of the ship acts downwards. These two forces form a couple, the arm of which is G Z, tending to restore the positions respectively
;
;
The moment
ship to the upright position.
moment of
called the
statical stability
of this couple
is
and since the weight and
;
buoyancy are constant whatever the angle of heel may length of the arm, G Z, will be a measure of the
be, the statical
stability.
The dynamical
stability is the
mechanical worli necessary to
heel the ship over to any angle.
Either by taking the
ways.
sum
It
may
be measured in two
of the distances through which
the centre of gravity ascends, and the centre of buoyancy descends,
means
moving from their vertical into their inclined and multiplying it by the weight of the ship. Or, by
in
positions,
of the formula
Dynamical
moment
:
stability
= flsld
of statical stability, r
I
think
will
it
=
\^
9; where
rcl
M = the
arm
GZ
of
=
6,
security of ships of the ordinary form,
when
f
the lengih of the
and \V the weight of the ship. be seen upon consideration that the
the couple, at an inclination
Now
6
=
when under
canvas, or
rolling in a seaway, against being turned over
gust of wind, or by a deep the fact that the
moment
roll,
in a great
by a sudden measure upon
of statical stability increases with the
angle of inclination, which to the angle of heel.
depends
it
generally does, nearly in proportion
In the case of a ship under
water, the angle of heel increases until the
sail,
moment
in
smooth
of statical
moment of the wind upon the sails and becomes a position of equilibrium if the force of the wind remains constant. In order that this inclined position may be stability is equal to the
;
this
one of stable equilibrium,
moved from stability sails;
this
it is
necessary that,
when the
position towards the vertical, the
should decrease and become less than the
and
that,
the
moment
the
sails.
when she
is
ship
moment moment
is
of of
heeled over farther from the vortical,
of stability should increase, so as to exceed
tliat
of
Or, in other words, in the neighbourhood of this in-
clined position of equilibrium, the
moment
of statical stability
should increase as the anglo of heel increases.
X 2
On
o8
The
the
conditions are the
seaway.
wave
Siability of Monitors imder Canvas. same
App.
for a ship carrying canvas in a
But, since the rolling, caused by the variation of the
and the variation of the force of the wind, takes is more considerable than the effect of the variation of the
surface,
place about the inclined position of equilibrium, and likely to
l)e
wind alone in above
tions,
still
becomes necessary that the condineighbourhood but should extend on both sides of it to
water,
it
stated, sliould not be confined to the
of the inclined position,
a safe distance beyond the probable extreme inclination of the
wave
ship to the If,
surface.
however, the stability
stood to
mean
wise stated
the
—and by
moment
— of any
stability I
of statical stability
must be under-
when not
other-
class of ships increases as the ship heels
when she reaches maximum, and then decreases
over, until,
a certain angle, as she
still
it
becomes a
continues to heel
over until will
it passes through zero and becomes negative, there be three positions of equilibrium of the vessel one of ;
stable equilibrium in the upright position,
equilibrium on each side of tion.
And
these
if
positions
it
and one of imstable
at a certain angle of inclina-
of imstable
equilibrium occur
within the limits of roll of an ocean steamer
when not under
canvas, the ship will evidently be unsafe for sea-going purposes.
be shown that, although the positions of unstable
It will also
equilibrium
fall
limit, the shi[)
beyond the limit of rolling, if they fall near that safe under steam, but may be totally unfit
may be
to carry sail.
The
first
condition to be fulfilled to enable a ship of the latter
class to carry sail will evidently be that the
any time
shall
not be greater than
stability of the ship.
Now, suppose
the
moment of maximum
sails at
statical
this condition fulfilled,
and
the ship heeled over, under the influence of the wind, to some
than that of greatest stability. It will be seen by any disturbing cause, such as the alteration of the wave slope, the ship Mere inclined beyond her position of maximum stability, the resistance to heeling would become less the farther she went, until she reached a position at which her moment of stability would be the same as before the disturbing And in this position she would remain in force began to act. unstable equilibrium if the disturbing forces were removed. But finite angle, less
that, if
App.
if
Oil the Stability
of Monitors 2cnder Canvas. 309
she should pass this position before the disturbini^ forces, and
the angular velocity caused by them, cease, the ordinary
moment
of the sails will then be greater than the resistance offered
by
the stability in any other position through which she will pass,
and she
will
General considerations led
be turned over.
us,
of
would be likely to
course, to foresee that the above critical state
occur in low-decked turret-ships, with great weights concentrated ;
but in order to find out more
stability did
vary in this class of ship as com-
upon and above their decks
how the
definitely
two
})ared witli that of ships of a liigh freeboard,
sliips
were
'Duncan' cut down to a freeboard of 8 feet G inches, and fitted ^^ith three heavy turrets, and a ship with the same displacement and immersed body as the Duncan when taken, viz. the
'
whose sides were continued up
so cut down, but
'
like those of
an
ordinary phip, observing that the centre of gravity was estimated
and
to be in the water-line in the latter case, it
in the
GZ
length of nation,
Fig.
The moment
former case.
Avere calculated in
and the
results are laid
'2
of a foot below
and the
of statical stability
each case at every
5'^
of incli-
down on the diagram shown
in
In this diagram, the angles of inclination of the
4.
ships are
marked along the base
ordinates
of
line,
and the corresponding
curves represent the
the
lengths
(on the scale
marked in the left-hand column) of the arm (G Z, Fig. 1) of the couple, at the ends of which the weight and buoyancy of the ship act, tending to restore her to the upright position.
The line, AaB, Fig. 4, shows how the stability of the Duncan monitor varies for the different angles of heel. Iler moment of statical stability increases nearly in proportion to the '
*
angle of heel through an inclination of 7° to be
immersed, as shown in Fig.
2,
and
;
the deck then begins tlie stability
which inclination the
stability is a
maximum.
is
still
The
at
all stability
inclined to 25°, arriving there at a position of un-
stable equilibrium,
over
.'),
It then begins to
decrease as the angle of heel increases, and she loses before she
increases
the ship reaches al)out 10^^, as in Fig
less rapidly, imtil
and past
this position her
tendency
is
to turn
farther.
line
A C,
Fig. 4, shows
ship of ordinary form.
And
it
how will
the stability varies in the
be seen that the
moment
of
310 On
the Stability
stability goes
of Monitors iindcr Canvas.
Afp.
on increasing through very large angles of heel
nearly in proportion to the inclination. FIG .3
FIC.2
Hitherto I have referred to the case of a monitor with a free-
board of 3 feet 6 inches, which is far more than the American monitors have possessed, and much more than has been contemplated by
many
persons
sailing monitors in
tliis
who have proposed the adoption country.
freeboard than most of our line-of-battle ships would possess cut
of
It is also certainly a greater
down and weighted with armour and
if
turrets to the extent
which has sometimes been recommended, and especially more if they were placed for coninto hands of any version the one not capable of resisting the
than we could depend upon getting
App.
On
the Stability
of Monitors binder Canvas. 311
temptation to produce a formidable-looking ship on paper by
adding armour regardless of weight.
6
7
8
e
10
U
la
J3
14
15
I
16
have therefore taken the
17
IH
20" 21"
22" ai* :i° 25' 21'
n'
Dt-grees of Inclination.
case of the
*
Duncan monitor with '
increased draught so as to
give a freeboard of 2 feet G inches, and also with a freeboard of
2
feet,
and have shown, bv means of the curves,
A^D,
and
3
1
On
2
A e E,
the Stability
Fig.
4,
of Monitors imder Canvas.
I assume the centre
liow their stabilities vary.
of gravity to remain in the
same
App.
position as before relative to
the ship, and therefore to be 1*2 feet below the water-line in the
former
ease,
former case,
and
1*7 feet
viz.
below
stability increases until the ship is inclined to
The edge
In the
in the latter case.
it
with the freeboard of 2 feet 6 inches, the
of the deck
is
an angle of
5*^.
then immersed, and as the ship goes on
increasing her angle of heel, the stability increases very slowly, until
reaches a
it
maximum
at 8°
then decreases, and the
it
;
ship reaches a position of unstable equilibrium at 18J° inclination.
In the case where the freeboard is
immersed when the ship
just
is
2
is
feet,
the edge of
inclined to 4°
up
;
tlie
deck
to this point
the stability increases nearly the same as in the other cases, and it
be seen that
will
value
and
it
has then almost reached
its
maximum
increases slightly until the angle of heel reaches 6J°, tlien decreases as the angle increases until the ship becomes it
;
unstable,
which takes place before she has reached 16°
incli-
nation.
I will here explain what seems at in Fig. 4.
We
see that the curve
first
AC
sight to be
lies inside
an anomaly
of the curve
A aB
at the small angles of inclination, thus showing that in
these
two
cases,
greater stability.
and
in these positions, tlie monitor has the
This
is,
of course, due
to the fact of her
centre of gravity being the lower, while both the displacement
and load-water section are the same in each case. But the curves A cZ D and A e E also fall inside of A « B at first, although the centre of gravity in the two former cases is much farther below the water than in tlie latter. This apparent anomaly may be explained in the following way The moment of inertia of the water-line remaining nearly constant as the ship sinks in the :
water,
—
while the displacement increases, causes the distance
between the metacentre and centre of buoyancy
to diminish
;
at
the same time the centre of gravity descends faster than the centre of buoyancy, and consequently approaches
it.
Now
if
the metacentre approaches the centre of buoyancy faster than the centre of gravity approaches
it,
the distance of the meta-
centre from the centre of gravity, and with
GZ
(Fig. 1), will be diminishing,
and
it
the
this is just
arm of the
lever,
what occurs here.
— On
App.
of Monitors iindtr Canvas.
the Stability
It is interesting also to
compare
tlie
dynamical
2^1
t^
stabilities, or
mechanical work necessary to heel these ships through equal This may be done by comparing the areas enclosed
angles.
(Fig. 4.) between the base line, the curves,
drawn to the curves
at
and the ordinates That
the particular angles of heel.
these areas are proportional to the dynamical stabilities
seen from the formula given before, Dynamical If
we take the
stability
case of the
draw the
moment
line
H m ^I
= W
may
be
:
j
r
d
6'.
monitor being heeled over to under the pressure of sail, and
first
H G, Fig. 4 (4°), line H m M, so that
the position
the
viz.
it
shall represent the variation of
due to their
and suppose the upon the other ships, it will then divide each of the areas A C B, A a B, A cZ D, and A e E into t\Yo parts, the lower of which will represent the work which the wind (at a constant pressure) would be capable of doing in overturning them, and the areas above the will represent the whole of the energy which the ship line H could put forth to withstand any additional impulse, such as the effect of waves, or a sudden gust of wind. We thus see, by comparing the areas, H C X, H a M, He? m, and the small part of AeE above H M, the relative amounts of energy stored up in the ships when sailing at the given inclinations, and this energy it is which chiefly constitutes their safety. Comparisons may be made in the same way at any other angles of heel under sail. It must be obvious from this that the danger to be apprehended to these monitors, when under canvas, is very great.. And when we think that tliey are liable at any moment to be overtaken by sudden gusts of wind, and that, if they are heeled over beyond 8° or IC^, the farther they go the less resistance they of
sails,
inclination
;
also to represent the effect of the sail
M
being capsized, their unfitness to carry
offer to
sail
must be
cpiite
evident. If
it
should occur to any one to consider that the case of an
ordinary barge subject as I
am
is
both an illustration and a refutation of the
here stating
it,
I
would beg leave to remind him the barge
that the two cases difler in a most essential respect
—
usually has nearly the whole weight, both of her hull and of cargo, below the water, and therefore comparatively low
h<'r
down
;
3
1
On
4
whereas
the Stability
it is
of Monitors 7tnder Canvas,
App.
the object of these monitors to carry a large weight
of armour, guns, and turrets, mainly above water, so that the
centre of gravity stability
—the position
of which
—cannot well be got low down.
is
so important to the
Any
one who will take
the trouble to closely compare the two cases will find that they differ
exceedingly, and that, although barges sometimes carry a
deck cargo,
always of comparatively light material, and,
it is
when unbalanced by weights height of freeboard and this ;
in the hold, leaves a considerable
leads
me
to observe that the state
of the monitor which I have been describing would
materially modified
if
become very
the centre of gravity of the vessel could
be greatly lowered, say to the extent of many feet. If, for example, it could be brought down to the depth of the centre of
buoyancy, or beyond that,
when the
it.
On
reverting to Fig.
1, it will
be seen
ship heels over in the direction of the arrow, the
moves out in the same direction. This is more or less, however low the freeboard. We also see
centre of buoyancy, C,
the case,
that, if the centre of gravity, G, of the ship
vertical
moves
line,
in
G W,
through
G,
the same direction.
GW
in
the
is
above C, the
inclined
position
In other words, the vertical
B M,
both move outwards in the direcand we have seen that in the case of the monitors which we have been considering, owing to the low freeboard, B moves slowly, so to speak, and is soon overtaken by G W, and the ship then capsizes but if we suppose the centre of gravity to be below the centre of buoyancy, say at g, and and draw the vertical line g W, then it is obvious that, as the ship is inclined, B and g move off from the middle line in opposite directions, and the distance between them, and conlines,
and
tion of the arrow
;
M
;
M
sequently the statical
W
stability, increases as the ship heels over.
This case, no doubt, corresponds to that of the sailing barges, loaded deep with hold-cargoes, before referred to illustration of the fact that vessels
which
;
and
may seem
it is
a good
to a casual
observer alike in principle may, nevertheless, be seen by the
naval architect to possess totally opposite qualities.
A
very
little
reflection will suffice to
show that we cannot
as a rule avail ourselves of this last exhibited principle in the
construction of armoured monitors. is
to increase the
upper weights, that
The tendency is
of things
to say, the weights of
On
App.
the Stability
of Monitors nnder Canvas,
315
the deck, the turrets, and the gun?, and to lighten the construction of the hull below water as
much
as possible
and although
;
the resort to great engine-power and coal supply
^^
ould tend to
correct this tendency and to lower the centre of gravity,
it
is
extremely improbable that in future iron-built ships we sludl ever have a very low centre of gravity associated with the monitor type of vessel. I
do not, however, wish to use the present paper as a bar to
future developments of the monitor system
;
its
sole object
is
to
show that monitors having their centres of gravity situated approximately like the centres of gravity of other ships would be quite unfit to carry a press of canvas. Before closing this paper, I
may make
a
few observations on
the behaviour of these monitors as influenced by wave motion.
I
have already referred to the fact that the steadiness at sea of some of our iron-clads is due to their want of stiffness or stability, and their consequent increased time of oscillation in still water and, ;
I
may
add, that
have great
it is
a very well-established fact that ships which
stiffness in still w^ater are
very uneasy
rollers.
Now,
be seen that these monitors converted from line-of-battle ships, as before mentioned, have great stiffness for small angles
it will
of inclination, and they would consequently start rolling under
the same influences as ordinary ships which are very
a lofty freeboard.
stiff and have This would, but for another consideration, be
a very dangerous feature in the monitors, because
it would cause became large, and they would then get into positions where their stabilities would be small and decreasing, and from which, if under canvas, they might not be able to right themselves. Suppose, for instance, a ship of this kind rolling among waves of the same periodic time Should she roll beyond her position as her small oscillations. of maximum stability, she would have her time of roll increased, and tlie following circumstances Avould then occur: When reaching the hollow, she would not have flnished her oscillation, and might be still rolling towards the ajtproachiiig wave; the alteration of the direction of the water surface caused by tlie front of the approaching wave instead of de-
them
to roll quickly until the
range of
roll
—
—
veloping
in
the ship a greater inonuMit of stability tending to
right her, as
is
the case with
all
ships which iiavc a high free-
On
3i6 board
of Monitors 2indcr Canvas.
the Stability
— would
diminish what stability there was remaining, and
the danger of her being blown over, very great.
App.
The
if
sail, would be would appear to
she carried
stability of these ships, in fact,
vary in the worst manner possible for safety. They would have all the characteristics of very uneasy ships until they rolled deeply, and not have the advantage of an increasing stability to
prevent their rolling too
The
far.
this state of things materially
board, wliich deprives
them
is,
consideration which modifies
that the very absence of free-
of the necessary stability at great
inclinations, would usually operate in the early stages of rolling
which the waves impress. the amplitude of rolling is undoubtedly
to mitigate the impulses
And besides this, much diminished by
the disturbance of the water, which the
immersed angle between the deck and the side causes, and is still further diminished by the plan adopted in America of allowing the armour and backing to project from the side, instead of their being imbedded in the side as proposed in In fact, this prothe cases which we have been considering. jection of the armour beyond the side must play an important Its part in the alleged steadiness of the American monitors. action is like that of an immense bilge keel, and is very effective For instance, if a ship of the in diminishing the angle of roll. form of Fig. 5 were set rolling, the resistance caused bv the
action of the projection at
A
on the surrounding water would be
very great, and would tend to diminish the amplitude of
The
action of the angle B,
of the
same kind
in all monitors,
or not, would be as follows
the side
A
B, the angle
amplitude of
roll,
B
:
roll.
when immersed, which would be whether the armour projected
— If the ship were
would have very
but as soon as the ship
rolling towards
little effect
commenced
on the
to return
App.
O71 the Stability
iindcr
Cauras.
317
would act to prevent her, and tlius tend to of roll and, by diminishing the force
to the upright, it
increase
of Monitors
her time
;
with which she returns to the upright, w^ould indirectly tend to decrease the amplitude of the next
It will thus
roll.
that the action ou the water by the angle at right direction, while
against the ship
when
A
is
action of the angle at
tlie
when she
is
in the
most
critical
be seen
always in the
B may
be
positions, viz.
she has rolled over to an inclination W'here her stability
very small
— and
is
with decks as low as the American monitors
—
this would be the case at very moderate angles of roll so that by losing A while retaining B, which we do if we put the armour in a recessed side, we give up a really valuable feature,
while we retain one which, under certain circumstances,
may prove
need hardly add that I am here speaking only of monitors which have to serve at sea, and not at all of mere harbour defence ships. I have recently had occasion to consider two other cases of a somewhat similar kind. We are building for the Government a disadvantage.
I
Melbourne an iron-clad monitor with a height of deck above feet, and with an armour-plated breastwork surrounding the bases of the turrets, and enclosing the hatcliways, as in Figs. 6 and 7. This monitor has to be navigated to i\Ielbourne, and for this purpose is to be fitted with a temporary at
the water of 3
side
and upper deck. A F K and
the curves
by means of
I liave
shown
A F L,
the variation of the stability of
in Fig.
4.,
this vessel with different conditions of freeboard, observing that,
as this
is
a very
much much
actual stability
is
shows how her
stability
up
smaller vessel than the less
would increase
if
shows how
it
varies
when the
is
AFK
and
aft.
The curve
side runs uj) before
abaft the breastwork only, as in Figs. 8
between these two curves
Duncan,' the
the side were continued
as an ordinary ship, the whole length fore
AF L
'
The curve
than in her case.
and
1).
The
and
difference
caused by the break in the ship's
and shows how the stability is influenced by a departure of this kind from the usual continuous In neither case, however, have we that alarming decrease side. and loss of stability which the monitor projx^- would unside in
wake
of the breastwork,
doubtedly possess, especially with a very low freeboard. In concdnsion, f will onlv add that it will bo no answer to the
3i8
On
tJic
Stability
of Monitors iinder Canvas.
doctrines of this paper to say that the rolling of ships
by the
lateral distribution of weights as well as
That
by
is
App.
affected
their vertical
and would deserve great But my ruling argument is that the monitors we have considered would be dangerously deficient of statical stability, and this argument would hold heiglits.
is
undoubtedly
attention in a discussion
upon
true,
rolling.
equally with their weights either distributed or concentrated.
Index.
——
——
—
.
.
3^9
(
INDEX. BACKING TO ARMOUR.
ACHILLES.
Achilles,'
Armour
the
speed trials
of,
armour
24, 32.
of,
12, 15, 95, 98, 101.
•'
—
built-up " must be distinguished from laminated, 39, 40.
40. of English iron-clads, built and building,
alteration in the protection of, 47.
solid, best for iron-clads, I
weight of hull and weights carried, 87. times coal supply will last at certiiin
I
7,
24-31.
i
further increase in thickness probable,
speeds, 109. I
31. tabular statement of thicknesses in our
sailing c;ipabilities of, 128, 130.
records
of rolling
139, 145, 149,
of,
150-157, 158-lGO. comparison of with ' Bellerophon,' 169. unhandy on account of great length,
ships, 32.
of French iron-clads, 33.
of most American
175. results of trials of turning,
177, 179,
nominal cost
compared with
of,
'
Warrior ' system, 45. Hector ' system, 45, Complete protection, 46. Central battery and armour-belt sys'
details of expenditure on, 218. Agincourt,' the armour of, 32. speed of, 95.
cost of, 2
'
the,
class,
of French iron-clads
—
her loss has no bearing upon the pioper form of bow for iron-clad rams, 274-279.
American iron-clads
—
38, 41. disposition of armour on, 51. speeds
of,
64.
of,
attained
by,
{See
103.
also
Monitors.) '
Ariadne'
tlie,
fiigati's,
Armament of '
Wan ior
—
^
'
of,
32.
weight of hull and weiirhts carried, 87, 89, 297, compared with ' Defence,' 89. outlay upon up to January, 1868, 219. compared with Zealous,' 297. Austrian iron-clads '
one
of our
fastest
94.
En(jli>ih iron-clads '
'
aimour
variety in designs of, 2.
armament
tem, 47. system, 50. Invincible on French and American ship^, 50. bieastwoik-mcnitor system, 52. connection between weight and thickness of. and forms of ships, 184, 196, 200. Atalanta,' the Confedeiate iron-clad her Weehawken,' 66, 251. figlit with the ^Audacious,' the '
7.
1
armour of, 36. Amazon,' the unarmoured sloop
armour
at
first
armed
wood
— with
experience had at Lissa with, 258, 273,
68-
heavier guns since introduced, 58, 59. tiible of weights, etc., of present naval guns and projectdes, 61. of French iron-clads, 63. of American iron-clads, 64. (»SVe
Armour —
duns.)
279.
Backing
to
armour
—
in earlier iron-clads, 24.
improvement-s in
'
Bellerophon,' 26. ' Hercules,'
exceptional arrangements in
30, table of thicknesses in
our
relative strengths of, in
approximate law of resistance for single
and laminated,
ships, 32.
wood
ships, 36.
of French
solid plates, 7, 39.
relative strength of solid
—
vai iety in designs of, 2.
jjounders, 57.
also
lami-
'
Belle-
rophon's,' 215.
'Alma'
is
dispositions of
181.
*
iron-clads
nated, 38. thicknesses of, on American monitors, 41
iron-clafls, 36.
of American iron-clads, 41 does not decay rapidly, 74.
.ind
iron
— —
—
—— —
'
Index
320
UROADSIDK IRON-CLADS.
balanci:d-rudder.
Balanced-rudder
—
'
given to ram-ships, 20, 21)1. ' ' Bellerophon's performance ell'ect oil
under
131. Hercules,' llU.
sail,
jointed, of
'
Bar, or batten instrument only correct means of observing angles of rolling, 143. used by the French, 143. now supplied to all our ships, 162. Batteries, floating, built during Crimean war, 2, 33. armoured, of broadside ships " Box" or ' Warrior system, 45. ' Hector's ' arrangement, 45. ' ^linotaur's ' arrangement, 46. with armour belts, 47, 68. bow and stern, 49, 68, 151. class, 50 upper-deck of 'Invincible' 69. Mr. Eads' proposal for, 227. '
Battering system of naval ordnance —
condemned by American Ordnance Committee, 67.
Battery, Belier,'
tlie
armour
'
American Stevens',
the French
with
'
ing, 5^7.
weight of hull and weights carried, 87. speed trials
of,
95, 98.
sailing capabilities of, 127.
rolling of, 148.
Bellerophon,' * Lord compared with Clyde,^ and 'Hercules,' 168, 172, '
173.
an unhandy ship, 174.
—
Bow-fire of protected guns importance of, 4, 68, 231. means of obtaining, 57, 68, 230. wanting in many turret-ships, 230. Boivs of iron-clads changes in form and structure of,
3,
f)rm
for
first
introduced into
'
Bellerophon,'
80.
described and compared with
of,
contrasted
weisjht of hull and weights carried, 87, certain speeds,
109. sailing capabilities of, 126, 128, 131.
records of rolling, 149, 150-157,
160. dimensions
armour
clads26, 32.
Warrior's,' 81, 85.
88. times coal will last at
the ship to ' Warrior,' 3. of, 24, 32. disposition of armour on, 45. battery guns have only broadside trainsister
Bracket-frame system of constructing iron-
armour on, 47, 49, 68.
arrangements
Black Prince,
of the proper ram-ships, 265-281.
target, 27.
structural
—
introduced into the ' Enterprise,' and since generally adopted, 47. advantages of as compared with other systems, 48.
consideration
speed trials of, 12, 15, 95, 97, 98, 101, 190. target of, differs greatly from * Chalmers' disposition of
Belt-and battery system of protection
of,
19.
36. has twin-screws, 264. is wood-built, 282. Belleroyhon' the inm-bow of, 3, 276, 282. of,
of, 7,
101.
—
2.
ram
armour and backing armament of, 8, 59.
Belliqueuse,' the French iron-clad, speed
details of cost of, 217.
alopted by Americans, 64. compared with punching system, 65.
*
'
158-
164. and compared with ' Black Prince 'Achilles,' 168, 169. very handy under steam, 175. turning trials of. 177, 179, 181. steaming performances compared with 'Minotaur's' and 'Warrior's,' 190, 192. new design based upon, considered in Royal ^Society Paper, 203. nominal cost of, compared with that of Achilles,' 215. details of cost of, 218. of,
'
' Warrior's system, 81. usefulness of double-bottoms as a means of safety, 82. adapted to prevent loss by torpedo explosions, 83. summary of advantages of, 85. Dr. Fairbairn's remarks on, 86. weights of hull of ships so built, illustrating lightness of construction, 87. adopted generally for large ships built in this country, 90. Breastwork-monitors (see Monitors).
Breech-loading guns adopted by the French, 63. not so efficient as heavy muzzle -loading guns, 64. 'Bristol,' the wood fiigate speed attained by, 107.
time coal would last at certain speeds, 109. Broadside iron-clads increased horizontal range of guns in
—
recent, 4, 68.
systems of protection adopted superior
in
fighting
power
American monitors, 139. outlay upon our, 217-221.
in,
at
45-50. sea
to
— ——
—
— Index.
321
BROADSIDE IROX-CLADS. Broadside iron-dads
CONVERSION.
—
Channel Squadrons,
now be worked
heaviest guns can
gun ports have
to be
in,
224.
turrets, 225. weight of armour per gun less than turret-ships, 225. guns possess independent training
sailing trials, 127.
records of rolUng, 134, 135, 148, 149, in
in,
157. turning trials, 179, 181. Clinometer, use of the, for observing angles
220, 233.
of
guns might be mounted in pairs on, 220. better adapted for masts and sails than existing turret-ships, 228.
have greater
and
for raising
facilities
securing boats than turret-ships, 2o3.
Bidhheads —
armoured at ends of batteries, 45, 48, 50. watertight, **
usefulness
their
in
reports on trials of
full speed trials at sea, 12, 15.
larger than in
iron
ships, 76, 81, 83, 286. wing," valuable in iron-clads, 285.
144.
roll,
Coal supply of iron-clads
—
intimate connection with steaming capab.lity, 103. mistaken statements made respecting,l 04. connection between type of engines and its
rate of consumption, 104, not to be judged by rate of consumption on measured-mile trials, 106. but bv the rate at good speeds, 12 or 12i knots, 107. is
table of times coal will last certain ships
Caledonia,
and her
the,
speed trials
armour
of,
of,
at 11 and 12 J knots, 109. on the whole superior to that of wood war ships, 110. recent iron-clads are better off than
class
12, 96, 98.
24, 33.
weight of hull and weights carried, 87, 88.
earlier iron-clads, 1 10. '
sailing capabilities of, 128.
centre of gravity
of^
sion, 137. dimensions of, 164, 166. cost of, 218. coirespoud to ' Gloire and * Flandre classes of French navy, 292. Canonicus,' the American monitor side-armour of, 41.
—
between position
of,
higli positions of, 147.
breastwork
monitor,
54,
— differences between his target '
Bellerophon's,' 27.
in iron-clads
sunimaiy of principal, mackrior's design,'
lor new ships, 186. not to be taken as sole standards of merit for all iron-c!ads, 187.
conditions essential to their useful applition to iron-clads, 188.
Conversion of line-of-battle ships into ironclads
—
remarks on the 'Caledonia' {see
'
chtss,
292
Caledonia),
diflerently, 293. •
3U8.
Changes
*
and ship's
steadiness, 145.
means of securing
Chalmers, Mr. and the
230. system of working turrets superior to the American, 254. the Koyal Sovereign' converted on his designs, 294. Confederate iron-clads, 66, 250, 272. Constants of i
finished ships required to be converted
deckers, 137.
the
be
to
—
dimensions of, 164. expenditure upon up to January, 1868, 219. devices for working sails in, 228. limitations of range of turret-guns, 230. simultaneous fire of turret-guns, compared with that of the battery guns of 'Hercules,' 233. diameter of turrets of, 240. Centres of gravity of iron-clads usually lower than those of wood two-
Cerberus,'
coal
—
his design of the turret-ship 'Captain,' '
armament of, 8, 59. armour of, 29, 32.
'
have exceptionally enables
economised, 126.
Captain,' the tuiTet-ship
relation
class
capability
sailing
Coles, Captain
turrets of, 43. '
'
large supplies, 126.
lowered by conver-
'
'
Thunderer
since
6,
chief causes of, 7, 19. imj)ortant structural, 70, 80.
'
War-
Zealous
'
and
'
Koyal Sovereign
'
were
converted, 293, 294.
schemes proposed mostly for tuiTct coast defence ships, 293. designs for the. have been prepared at tiie Admiralty, 295. 299. reasons why they Ijuvc not Ixen cauied out,
296-299.
for turning thos«' ships into rigged seagtiing monitors not admis-
schemes sible,
299-302.
Y
—
— ——
Index.
322
ENTERPRISE.
CONVERSION. Conversion of line-of-'battle ships into ironclads
Dictator,' the American monitor turret of, 43. dimensions of, 246.
*
—
mi.-taken arguments advanced in favour of,
Dimensions of iron-clads
302.
money
for, better
required
spent on
new
Copper sheathing for iron
of
table
—
Cost of our iron-dads varying incidental chai-ges made upon sliips built in Royal dockyards, 214. effect of arbitrary charges on nominal cost of those ships, 215. 12.^ per cent, on net outlay a sufficient allowance for such charges, 216. up to January, 1868 of completed contract-built broadside ships, 217. of completed government - built broadside ships, 218. of unfinished broadside ships, and of turret-ships, 219. total outlay, 220. up to January, 1869, 221. onlv one-eleventh of expenditure upon the navy from 1859 to 1869, 221. savings effected by adopting ships of
—
ships,
and remarks
164-166.
of French ships, 167. of our recent ships and their moderate
built iron-dads,
79, lUU. Corvettes, wood, speeds attained by ouv, 95.
our
for
thereon,
iron-built ships, ;>03.
proportions, 167. Bellerophon ' compared with * Blnck Prince 'and 'Achilles,' 168, 169. of ' Lord Clyde ' and ' Lord Warden,' 171. • Lord Clyde ' compared with ' Black Prince,'" 172. 'Hercules' compared with 'Black Prince,' 173. moderate, give great handiness, 174 (see Handiness). table of for some English and American ships, 246. Double-bottoms in iron-clads form part of bracket-frame system, 80. give great safety and strength, 81, 83, '
—
^Duncan,' the
line-of-battle ship
speed attained by, 107.
times coal would last at 11 and 12 J knot speeds, 109. Dunderberg,' the casemated ship (now ' L'ochambeau') singular features of, 2. remarkable speed trials of, 102.
'
moderate dimensions, 170, 206, 211, 222. Couronne,' the French iron-clad, armour of,
'
———
—— —
33.
Du
ram-bow of, 271. Pont, Admiral, his remaiks on American monitors
on 127.
sea-going qualities
Sir Sidney, his repoits
Dacres, Admiral
sailing capabilities of iron-clad s,
rolling of iron-clads, 134, 148.
fighting qualities
Dutch iron-clads
'
Defence,' the
'
of, 4,
Each, Mr., the American engineer his plan for
57.
moderate, 9, 164, 166. armour of, 24, 32. disposition of armour on, 45. weight of hull and weights carried,
dimensions
239, 254. Engines, marine
new and
speed trials
of,
'
old tvpes of, in iron-clads, compared, 104,' 194.
Audacious,' 89.
rates of fuel-consumption in
96.
of new type
of 148, 158-160.
rolling
cost of, 217.
fect
the, our longest
and
finest line-of-
Devastation,' the breastwork -monitor
has no masts or t!ie
armour
of',
sails,
them, 112, 194.
Enterprise,' first
the— small iron-clad,
novel upper works '
large coal supply of, 126.
Dictator,'
tvpes,
required experience to per-
of,
9.
21, 78.
armour
armour of, 7, 31, 32. armament of, 8, 59.
'
'
our
battle ship, 94.
two
108.
sailing capabilities of, 128, 131.
•
in
remarks on the turrets of monitors,
his
87.
Defiance'
working broadside guns
pairs, 226.
of,
compared with
'
of, 2.
Prinz Hendrik,' turret-ship, 139.
—
limited horizontal range of guns in bat-
tery
—
variety in designs
importance of handiness, 174. Deck armour of monitors, must be strong, 51, 253.
244. 252.
of,
of,
126, 133.
of, 33. battery and belt in,
'
47.
sj)eed trials of,
Amcriian monitor
cost of, 218.
42, 43.
dimensions
of,
96.
246.
system
first
adopted
—— ——
——
—
.
•
Index. ERICSSON.
—
Ericsson, Mr., on deck-armourof monitore, 51.
Expenditure on our iron-dads Experiments
—
Frencli iron-clads armour of 33.
[see Cost).
armour aimament of doulitfid dispositions of
on Miiiotam* ' target, 25. on ' Hercules target, 30. on ''small plate" Uirget, 37. on laminated targets, oS. on Gibraluir shield, 39. Iron Armour,' Colonel Inglis' reon marks, 40. with English and American guns, 65. made on 'Royal Sovertign' at Ports'
on. 50. efficiency, 63.
mostly wood-built, 77, 281.
'
speeds attained by, 101, rolling of, 135, 137, 145. dimensions of, 167. intended to act as rams, 256. watertight bulkheads recently fitted 286. Frigates, our wood
'
237".
mouth,
zn
GUNS, NAVAL,
armament
in,
of, 5*i,
steaming capabilities of, 93. dimensions of largest, 164.
Fairhairn, Dr., on the bracket-frame system,
Froude, Mr.,
S6. '
his valuable investigations
on
rolling of ships, 144.
Favorite,' the
armour
ot,
Fuel, supply and consumption clads [see Coal sui)ply).
33,
in iron-
of,
speed-trials of, 96.
dimensions of, cost of, 218. '
•
Ferdinand
164-. '
Max,'' the Austrian iron-clad
her performances at Lissa, 258. sustained no serious injury to her rambow, 273, 279. Flandre,' the, class of French iron-clads
armoHr
of,
time coal would last at 11 and 12^-knot speeds, 109. Gibraltar Shield, experiments made on, 39. Girders, longitudinal behind armour, 27, 85. ' Glatton,' the breast work-monitor
—
36.
lank with our 'Caledonia' class, 292. Forins and proportions of iron-clads weight and tiiickne>s of armour should inriuence, 183, 199. not to be determined with a view to obtaining high constants of perfoim-
armour of, 7, 32. armament of, 8, 59.
—
ance, 187, 189. remarks on steaming performance of long and short sliips, 190-196. moderate proportions desirable in thicklyplafel ships, 196.
Abstract of Royal Society Paper on, 200. consideration of a design based on * Hercules and Minotaur,' 208. '
'
Foulness of bottom seiiously
—
reduces
speeds
of iron-clads.
deck-armour v^e'ght j
his
report on Trnns-Atlantic
voyage of the monitor 248.
Free-hoard of iron-clads re;d
advantages
of
'
Miantonomoh,'
—
low, 52.
rolling not necessaiily aiused by high,
137. nor necessarily reduced by low, 138. low, has many disadvantages, 139. French iron-clads
—
variety in designs '
La
now
of, 5 1 bull and weights carried, 87,
first of their iron-clad ships, 2.
armour
of,
33.
speed of, 101. dimensions of, 167. ranks with our ' Caledonia,' 292. Goldaborough, Admiral, on iron-cdad rams, 258, 260. Goodenough, Cai)t;iin, on the handiness of iron-clads, 176,
means of preventing, 78, 100. must serious in very long ships, 197. Fox, Mr,, Assistant-Secretary of Americnn
—
0^'
90, 297. compared with 'Royal Sovei«,:^'i,' 297, 303. ^Gloire,' the French iron-clad
13, 19.
Navy
Galatea,' tne wood frigate speed attained by, 107.
of, 1.
Gloire,' first ship, 2.
built with wood bottoms and iron upper-works, 21, 78.
Great Eastern,' the structural arrangements of, 82. Guns, naval, f>nglish increase in weight and power of, 8, 58, deorea.se in number of guns ciinied by
'
—
ships, 49, 58.
improved methods of mounting broadside,
57, 224.
table of weights, etc., of past
and pie-
sent, 61.
comparative powers of past and present, 58, 62,
compared with
French and American,
63, 65.
French
power compared with Fnglish, 63.
increase in weight and
Y
2
of,
o."5.
—
3H
Index. GUNS, NAVAL.
Guns, naval
—American
IIION-CLADS.
—
—
—
——
—
Index.
3^5 MEASURED-MILE TRIALS.
IROX-CLADS.
Long iron-dads
Iron-dads, our Bellerophon ' and ' xMinotaur/ 203. the Hercules and case based upon Minotaur,' 208. savings due to introduction of shorter ships, 170, 206, 211, 222.
upon
cases based
'
'
cost of,
use
i
in,
196.
cases considered in Royal Society paper,
201, 203, 206.
214 (see Cost). rams {see Rams),
new
design based upon * Minotaur,' compared with ' Hercules,' 208.
as
of,
proposed additions to [see Conversion). foreign {see American, Austrian, Dutch, French, Prussian, Russian, Spanish, and Turkish). ,
Iron Dulce,' the, armour of, 32. Iron hulls for iron-dads {see Hulls). Iron Plide Committee, tlie law of resistance for armour given by,
Lord
Clyde,' the speed trials of, 12, 15, 18, 95, 98. armour of, 21, 26, 33, 171. bow battery on upper deck of, 50, 151. weight of hull and weights carried, 87,
*
*
88. sailing capability of, 128.
7,
rolling of, 142, 148-157.
39.
dimensions of, 164, 171. compared with ' Black Prince,' 172. turning trials of, 177, 179, 181.
experiments on laminated armour, 38. Iron iipper-worJis, for wood-built iron-clads, 21, 78. Italian iron-clads
—
258.
defeat' at Lissa,
cost of, 2
of, 15, 18, 95, 98. 21, 26, 33, 171. bow battery on upper deck of, 50. resisting power of side of, 65.
armour
fastest of her class, 95. *
Pallas,' 97.
of,
rolling of,
turrets of, 43.
dimensions
of,
246.
Keokuk,' the American of,
iron-clad,
ram-bow
'
271.
Laminated armour
Magenta,' the French iron-clad armour of, 33, 50. steadiness of, 137, 148.
Manoeuvring
law of
'
Ocean,' 132.
Line-of-hatlle ships, wood armaments of, 56.
their conversion into iron-clads,
292
{see
'
at,
in
1866,
—
Warrior and Minotaur but unhandy, 165, 174. '
'
'
classes swift
principal objections to adoption of, 166,
184.
Marengo dass of French
{see
'
iron-clads, the,
armour of, 36, 50. Measured-mile trials of speed results of, for wood ships, 93.
—
results of, for iron-clads, 95, 98.
agree very fairly with results of six hours' runs, 97, 193. to be preferred to sea-trials on many
often condemned, 113.
now
Conversion).
Long iron-dads
iron-clads
of
accounts, 99, 114, 123. speeds obtained not expected to be maintained at sea, 100, 106.
steaming qualities of, 94. dimensions of, 164.
Lissa, remarks on the action 258, 273, 279.
poicer
Handinoss).
resistance for solid plates does not apply to, 39. must be distinguished from '* built-up " armour, 39. weaker than solid armour, 38, 41. Lennox, Lord Heniy, on the voyage of iron-
clad
:
speed of, 101.
—
adopted by the Ameiicans, 38. Shoebuiyness experiments on, 38.
'
141,148, 153-157
dimensions of, 164, 171. turning trials of, 177, 179, 181. cost of, 218. ram-bow of, 281.
Kalamazoo,' the Americ;\n monitor armour of, 42.
'
8.
speed trials
Jervois, Colonel, on iron armour, 40. ' Jason,' the wood corvette
compared with
1
ram-bow of, 276, 281. Lord Warden, the armament of, 8.
varietv in designs of, 2.
'
—
performances compared with those of short ships, 168, 177, 190. not much more economical of steampower than short ships, 196. frictional resistance of great importance
steaming
'
used
for
purposes
that
sea-trials
would servo, 1 1;^. primary objects of, 114. objections made to, considered!, 114. examples of " jockeying " on, 116. nothing of the kind possible
Navy, 117. unavoidable errors
of,
117.
in ships of
—
———
—
NEW
MEASURED-MILE TRIALS.
—
Measured-mile trials of speed awe required in making observations on,
sea-trials
•
turret-guns cannot be tired fore-and-aft, 230. has armoured bow and stern batteries, 230. diameters of turrets of, 240. Monitor,' tlie original Americanarmour of, 41. turret of, 43. experience with, and loss of, at sea, 244. ventilation, etc., of, 249. her fight with ' Merrimac,' 250, 272.
unnecessary,
the Confederate iron-clad her fight with the * Monitor,' 250. on Federal fleet at Hampton attack her
Merrimac'
roads, 272.
^Mersey,' the wood frigate steaming performances of, 94-, 98, 107. times coal would last at 11 and 12^-kuot speeds, 109. Metacentric-lieight of iron-dads, connexion of, with steadiness, 145. ' Miantonomoh,' the American monitor armour of, 42. Trans-Atlantic voyage of, 248.
Monitors
size
and proportions
of, 9,
164.
speed trials of, 15, 95, 97, 98, 101, 190. armour of, 25, 32. target of, compared with ' Warrior's,' 25. complete protection of, 46. alteration of
armament, 49, 58. and stern fire from pro-
'
possesses head
tected guns, 57.
weight of hull and weights carried, 87,
of,
strengthened and used for ramming, 257, 271.
spur-bow most efficient form ing them, 268. English breastwork
150-160.
turning trials of, 177, 181. weight and buoyancy of fore part, 184. steam-performances of, compared with Bellerophon's and Warrior's,' 190, 198. new design based upon, compared with ship based on Bellerophon,' 203. new design based upon, compared with * Hercules,' 208. '
armour of, 7, armament of, deck-armour
'
*
of,
dimensions '
51.
fire
voyage of, to the Pacific, 246, 250. Monarch,' the turret-ship
into,
'
298.
under canvas, 305.
experience off Charleston with, 243.
—
hitherto superior to breech-loading, 64.
adopted in our navy, 64. smooth-bore, adopted by Americans, 65. rified,
weight of hull and weights carried, 87,
devices for working sails of, 228.
Montauk,' the American monitor, report on
Muzzle-loading guns
armament of, 8, 59. armour of, 29, 32. 89. speed trials of, 95, 97. times coal would last at 11 and 12|-knot speeds, 109. dimensions of, 164. outlay upon, up to January, 1868, 219.
guns,
capable of fighting at sea, 242. designs for converting line-of-battle ships stability of,
246.
of turret
69.
42. of,
of,
all-round
possess
217.
of,
31, 32. 8, 59.
compared with American monitors, 53. compared with ordinary turret-sliips, 54.
remarks en ramming efficiency of, 263. Monadnock,' the American monitor
armour
for attack-
description of system, 52.
'
cost
from re-
ports on, 250.
principles of design exemplified in, 165.
'
'
qualities of, extracts
fighting
88. times coal would last at 11 and 12^-knot speeds, 109.
roUing
—American
laminated armour of, 41. turrets of, 43. deck-armour of, should be stronger, 51, 253. armaments of, 65. horizontal range of guns in, 69. speeds of, 103. protection of turret-base in, 238. Mr. Eads' remarks on turrets of, 239, 254. not satisfactory sea-going ships, 241. experience at sea with, resume' of reports on, 242. mistakes respecting sizes of, 245. IMonadnock and ' Miantovoyages of nomoh,' 246. ventilation and comfort of, doubtful, 249.
Minotaur,' the extreme
—
Monarch,' the turret-ship
in boiler-room on, 121.
do not render 124.
IRONSIDES.
•
119.
"jockeying"
'
—
Index.
326
*
——
—
*
Nahant'
the American monitor
behaviour turret of *
New
of, at Cliarleston,
jammed
243. 252.
in the attack,
Ironsides,' the American
ii
on-clad
their only broadside frigate, 2, 51.
speed attained by, 103.
— Index,
3^7 RAMS, IROX-CLAD,
Noble, Captain, his remarks on
—
Index.
328 RAMS, IRON-CLAD.
Bams,
iron-clad
ROYAL OAK.
—
— ———
— — Index.
3^9
ROYAL OAK. Tioxjal Oal:,
'
the—
speed trials
Sheathing
sailing capabilities of, 128.
rolling of, 148,
155-161.
of,
advantages
the turret-ship
phon
cost of conversion, 219, 294-,
number of turrets in, 226. experiments made at Portsmouth on, 237. first ship on Captain Coles' system, 294. weight of hull and ^veights carried, 297. compared with Cerberus ' and ' Glatton,' 303. Rudder-heads of iron-clad?, should be piotected, 3, 6, 48. ' Bupert,' the iron-clad ram armour of, 7, 32. dimensions of, 164. characteristic features of, 257. attacking force of, 263. is a twin-screw ship, 264. bow strengthenings of, 284. liussian iron-clads, variety in design of, 2, 226. Byler, Admiral, his remarks on sailing trials of Channel Squadron in 1868, 131. importance of handiness in iron-clads, 175, 260. iron-clad rams, 263, 289.
sail- power,
126.
on the whole satisfactory, 131. influenced prejudicially
'
by great lengths
of early sliii)s, 132. Salami s,' the despatch vessel, her race with ' Hehcon,' 123. Scorpion,' the turret-ship
armour
of,
speed trials
32. of,
96.
219. Scott, Captain improved methods of mounting broadside guns introduced by, 57, 224. remarks of, on advantages obtained by adopting heavy guns, 58, Sea- trials of speed of Clianuel Squadrons, 12, 15. not so reliable as measureJ-milo trials, 99, 114, 123. but useful and necessary, 124. /'«, Mr., Committee, system of charges on dockyard-built ships improved by, 216. cost of,
—
194-199.
ances,
'
201, 203, 206. Hercules ' compared with design ba^ed upon Minohvur,' 208. '
SMn-plating behind armour
—
Lord Clyde ' and Lord adopted in Warden,' 26. special arrangements of in * Bellerophon,' and later ships, 26, 85. table of thicknesses of, for our iron-clads, 32. '
'
increased resistance due to, 37. Sloops, wood, speeds attained by on measuredmile, 95.
Smart, Admiral, on the 134.
*
extracts from Reports on, 127.
Bellero-
cases considered in Royal Society Paper,
Sailing of iron-clads inlluemed by secondary causes, 17. sail-power necessary in most of onr
them only moderate
'
in design of, 185, 188. performances of, compared with those of long, 168, 177, 190. remarks on these comparative perfoi"m-
Smooth-hore guns
—
exemplified in
'
principles exemplified
'
ships, 125. reasons for giving
of,
and recent ships, 167. savings clllected by adopting, 170, 206, 2n, 222. much handier tlian long, 175, 261.
33.
exceptional
^
—
preferable to extremely long, 166, 212.
Boyal Sovereign,' armour
i-clads
outside, 79, 100.
zinc, 79. 100.
Short iron-clads
cost of, 218. '
-built
of
wood with copper
9G.
of,
rolling of iron-clads,
—
formerly in use in our navy, 56, 61. still used by Americans, 65. inferior to rifled guns, 65, 67. Solferino,' the French iron-clad armour of, 33, 50. speed of, 101. steadiness of, 137, 148.
Spanish iron-clads, variety in designs Speeds attained by l^nglish iron-clads
of, 2.
on measured-mile trials, 12, 16, 95, 98. on sea-trials, 12, 15. on six-hours' runs, 97, 190. French iron-clads, 101. American iron-clads, 103. our wood ships of wai-, 93. of ships, affected by secondary cuises,
11,99,189.
—
great expenditure of jx)\ver , required to increase high, 101. of, with engine, connection power, 194.
Spur-hows for iron-clad rams
—
generally ajiproved, 265. advantages claimed for, 266, 285. compared with fore-reaching and upright
bows, 2t;S. no seiious difliculty e.\perienced ing, 273.
in clear-
—
—— —
—
Index.
330 SPUK-BOWS.
Spur-hoivs for iron-clad rams. merits of", not inllueuced by loss of sloop Amazon,' 274. not likely to be twisted, 279. wave caused by, no serious disadvantage, 280. Steadiness of iron-dads not less than that of wood ships, 134. not prejudiced by liigh free-board, 137. not ensured by low free-board, 138. heaviest ships usually steadiest, 140. difficulties to be overcome in securing, 141. connection between metacentric height and, 145. high position of centre of gravity usually gives, 146.
Structure of iron-dads
'
—
fairly secured in recent ships, 148. comparative, of ships in Channel Squadrons, 156, 159.
—
sheathing propoi-ed for iron hulls, 78. improvements made in iron hulls, 80, 86. advantages of bracket-frame system, 81, 91. (/See Bracket-fiame.) provisions recently made against torpedoattacks, 82. connection between construction of hull and rolling, 142. considered in connection with use of
iron-clad rams, 281, 287. '
Sultan,' the
armour
of,
32.
weight of hull and weights carried, 87, '
89. Swiftsure,' the armour of, 32. bottom sheathing
probably an
of,
79, 100.
132.
efficient cruisei",
Steaming of iron-dads — importance
Table
of, 93.
results of trials of our ships, 12, 15, 95,
compared with that of wood
shi];)s,
96,
connected with coal supply of ships, 103. (See Coal Supply.)
—
secondary causes aflect development of, 11, 19, 99, 189. greatly increased expenditure of at high speeds, 101. developments of in old and new types of engines, 104.
economy
Steamship performance
—
Admiralty constants of, tests of merit in merchant ships, 185. but not sole standards of merit for ironclads, 186,
196.
between
Minotaur,' rior,' 190. '
'
))eiformances
of
'
rolling, 142.
cost of
'Achilles'
and
'Bellerophon,'
as
charged, 215. contract-built broadside ships, 217. government-built broadside ships, 218.
unfinished broadside ships, and turretships, all
Structure of iron-dads —
219.
iron-clads
up
to
January, 1868.
up
to
Januarv, 1869,
220.
variety caused by changes in, 20. reasons why some of our shi})s are woodbuilt, 70.
preferable
'
'
Bellerophon,' and 'War-
Sterns of iron-dads, changes in forms of, 3. Stevens' battery the American, 2. Stowage of iron-dads, influences their
•
'
'
conditions necessary to fair use of constants in comparing iron-clads, 188.
com])aiison
guns and projectiles, 61, weights of hull and weights carried by some iron-clads, 87, 297. times coal carried by certain ships would last at certain speeds, 109. dimensions and proportions of iron-clads, 164. comparison between Bellerophon and * Black Prince 168. 'Bellerophon' and 'Achilles,' 169. Lord Clyde and ' Black Piince,' 172. results of turning-trials of iron-clad? 177, 179, 181. dimensions and weights of hypothetical long and short iron-clads 203, 207. new designs based upon Minotaur and ' Bellerophon,' 206. Hercules ' and new design based upon 'Minotaur,' 210. '
not the prime feature of iron-clad designs, 184, 188. connection between developed, and speed, 194. of,
iron hulls
armour and backing on
iron-clads, 32. Aveights, etc., of
98. of French ships, 101. of American ships, 103.
Steam-poicer
of—
results of speed-trials of iron-clads, 13, 16.
thicknesses of
98, 190.
to
wood, 71, 86.
{See Hulls.) French still adopt wood hulls, 77.
all
iron-clads
221. expenditure on navy from 1859 to 1869, 221. dimensions of English and American iron-clads,
246.
—
——
— Index,
?>?>''
VARIETY OF IROXCLADS,
—
Targets comparative strength of
Turrets *
Wanior
'
and
of their becoming jammed, 237, 252, 254. protection of bases of, 238. Captain Coles' plan of working, 238, 254. diameters of, for heavy guns, 240. Turret-ships Captain type and breastwork monitors compared, 54. great horizontixl range of guns in, 69, 223. cost of our, 219, 221. guns available on both sides of, 224. errors made in advocating, 224. small ports possible in, 225. very large weight of armour per gun in, 225. independent training of each gun wanting in, 226. usually have two turrets, 226.
Minotaur,' 25. description of * Bellerophon target, 27, ' Hercules ' target virtually impeuetiable by 600-pounder gun, 30. trial of small-plate target, 37. trial of Mr. Hawkshaw's laminated, 38. strengths of various targets, 65. '
'
'
speed is
'
of, 34-.
of,
101.
European ship of her
first
'
—
class,
257.
wood-built, 282.
Tecumesh,' the American monitor, loss 245. Thunderer,' the breastwork-monitor
of,
armour of, 7, 31, 32. armament of, 8, 59. weight of hull and weights carried, 87, 90, 297. large coal supply of, 126. has no masts or sails, 126, 133. dimensions of, 16-4-. diameter of turrets of, 240. provisions sea,
Torpedoes
made
devices for working sails of, 228. most satisfactory type of, 229.
to render her efficient at
arcs of training of
arcs
ui',
produced by, 245.
—
s-hould be large, 4, 68.
verv limited in the earlier iron-clads, 4, 57, 68.
means of obtaining large arcs
of,
49, 68,
225, in turret-ships,
—
223, 225, 230.
—
Trials of ironclads speed at sea, 12, 15. speed on the measured-mile, 12, 1(5, 95, 98, 190. speed on the six hours' runs, 97, 190. sailing, 17, 127. rol]in
148-161.
iron-clad especially
Triumjili,'
armour
'
of, in
American monitors,
43.
adapted for ships without m:v-sts sails, 227, 232. ports of may be made smaller than broadside ports, 225. ports are vulnerable places in, 236, 253.
and
of,
speed trials
of,
Turrets—
in
iron-clad
rams,
the— 24, 32,
disposition of
32. bottom sheathing of, 79, 100. probable cruising qualities of, 132. Turhish iron-clads, vaiiety in designs of^ 2. Turning trials of iron-clads, 177, 179, 181.
best
Valiant,'
armour
tlu-
cons! ruction
fleet, 9.
valuable
264.
tuniinir, 177, 179, 181. '
guns often seriously
limited in, 230. importance of right ahead fire in, 231. ditficulties of raising and securing boats, 232. simultaneous fire of, compared with broadside ships', 233, vulnerability of gun-ports in, 236, 253. possibility of turrets becoming jammed in action, 237, 252, 254. small sea-going, with high speeds and heavy guns, cannot be built, 240. rapid adoption of, would not have been advisable, 250. {See also Monitors.) Twin-screu's introduction of, caused variety in our
probable employment of in ocean warfiwe, 83. provisions made in recent ships against attack by, 83. eflects
227.
difficult to design,
—
examples of
and sea-going
riggeii
242.
Training of protected guns
'
'
Taureau,' the French iron-clad ram
armour
—
possibility
dimensions
armour
of,
of,
on, 45.
96.
164, 166.
cost of, 217.
Vanguard,'
armour
of, 32. the, Vansittart, Captain, on handiness of ironclads 176, Variety of our iron-clads not so gieat as that of other navies, 1,
'
—
radical
and minor changes must be
dis-
tinguished, 4. principal causes of, 7, 8, 19,
not the means
ol"
actinj: toijethcr,
preventing them from 10,
3y
Index. VARIETY OF IRON-CLADS.
Variety of our iron-clads
—
ZIXC SHEATHING.
Aluemarle Street, London, September, 1868.
MR. MUKRAT'S
GENERAL LIST OF WORKS.
ALBERT'S
SPEECHES AND ADDRESSES ON
(Prince)
PUBLIC OCCASIONS; of his Character. Fcap. Svo. Is.
with an Introduction giving: some Outlines 10s. 6d.; or Popular Edition, Portrait.
Portrait. Svo.
ABBOTT'S
(Rev. J.) Philip Musgrave or, Memoirs of a Church of England Missionary in the North American Colonies. Post Svo. 2s. ;
ABERCROMBIE'S
(John) Enquiries concerning the Intellectual Powers and the Investigation of Truth. Fcap. Svo. 6s. 6d.
Philosophy of Svo.
the
Moral
Fcap.
Feelings.
45.
ACLAXD'S
(Rev. Charles) Popular Account of the Customs of India. Post Svo. 2s.
A New
^SOP'S FABLES.
AGRICULTURAL
With
Post Svo.
50lh Thousand.
With
Translation.
By Rev. Thomas James.
Preface.
and Wolf.
Manners and Historical
100 Woodcuts, by
Tekxiel
2s. 6J.
JOURNAL.
(The Royal) SOCIETY'S
Svo.
Fuhlished half-yearly.
AIDS TO FAITH
By various a Series of Theological Es.=?ays. Edited by William Thomson, D.D., Archbishop of York.
Writers. Svo.
9s.
AMBER-WITCH Svo.
A
most interesting Trial for WitchGerman by Ladt Duff Gordon. Post
2s.
LIST
ARTHUR'S
(The). Published 2IontJihj by Authori(>/. ISmo. U.Sd. (Little) History of
New
Illustrations.
Post Svo.
IDA'S Walks and Talks
AUSTIN'S
Woodcuts.
Fcap. Svo.
Calloott. 2s. 6J.
(Mrs.) Recollections of Tartar Steppes and their
Inhabitants.
a Ladt.
By Lady
England.
Edition, continued to \^62.
ATKINSON'S
AUNT
(The).
Translated from the
craft.
ARMY
:
Woodcuts.
16mo.
;
12i.
a Story
Book
(John) Lectures on Jurispritdence Law. New an I Chei per Edition. 2
of Positive
(Sarah) With Biographical
Fragments Notes.
for Children.
By
6«.
from
Post Svo.
;
or,
Vols.
German 10s.
the Philosophy Svo.
Prose
Writers.
—
WORKS
LIST OF
ADMIRALTY PUBLICATIONS
Issued by direction of the Lords
;
Commissioners of the Admiralty:
A MANUAL OF SCIENTIFIC ENQUIRY, for the Edited by Sir Third Edition.
John
F. Herschkl, and Rev. 'Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 9s.
Use of Travellers. Robert Main, M.A.
AIRY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS made at Gbeenwioh. 1836 to 1847.
Royal
4to.
50s. each.
ASTRONOMICAL RESULTS. 1848 to 1858. 4to. 8». each. APPENDICES TO THE ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 1836.— I.
Bessel's Refraction Tables.
Tables for converting Errors of R.A. into Errors of Longitude and Ecliptic 1837.— I. Logarithms of Sines and Cosines to Seconds of Time. II. Table for converting Sidereal into Mean 1842.— Catalogue of 1 439 Stars 8s. 1845. Longitude of Valentia. 8s. 1847. Twelve Years' Catalogue of Stars. 14s, 1851. Maskelyne's Ledger of Stars. Qs. 1852.— I. Description of the Transit Circle. 5s. II. Regulations of the Royal Observatory. II,
and nd N.P.D.
Iss.
P.
every Ten
)
ySs.
Solar Time. J
,
— — —
1853.— Bessel's Refraction Tables.
2s.
3s.
—
Description of the Zenith Tube. 3j. I. II. Six Years' Catalogue of Stars. 10s. Description of the Galvanic Apparatus at Greenwich Ob1856.— servatory. 8s. 1862.— I. Seven Years' Catalogue of Stars. 10s. II. Plan of the Building and Ground of the Royal Ob-"|
1854.
III.
servatory, Greenwich. Longitude of Valentia.
> 3s.
)
- MAGNETICAL AND METEOROLOGICAL TIONS.
Royal
1840 to 1847.
OBSERVA-
50s. each.
4to.
- ASTRONOMICAL, MAGNETICAL, AND METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS,
Royal
1848 to 1864.
4to.
50s. each.
-ASTRONOMICAL RESULTS. 1848 to 1864. 4to. - MAGNETICAL AND METEOROLOGICAL RESULTS. 1848
to 1864.
4to.
8s.
each.
- REDUCTION OF THE OBSERVATIONS OF PLANETS. 1750 to 1830.
Royal
50s.
4to.
LUNAR OBSERVATIONS. to 1830.
2 Vols.
Royal
4to.
1750
50s. each.
1831 to 1851.
BERNOULLI'S SEXCENTENARY TABLE. BESSEL'S AUXILIARY TABLES FOR
IIIS
4to.
LoJidon, 1779.
4to.
METHOD OF CLEAR-
ING LUNAR DISTANCES. 8vo. FUNDAMENTA ASTRONOMIJE: iZe^ionion^i, 1818. Folio. 60s. BIRD'S METHOD OF CONSTRUCTING MURAL QUADRANTS. London,\im.
4to.
2s. Qd.
METHOD OF DIVIDING ASTRONOMICAL INSTRUMENTS. London,n67. 4to. 2s. 6d. COOK, KING, AND BAYLY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. London, 1782.
4to.
21s.
ENCKE'S BERLINER JAIIRBUCH, for 1830. Berlin, 1828'. 8vO. 9s. GROOMBRIDGE'S CATALOGUE OF CIRCUMPOLAR STARS. 4to.
10s.
HANSEN'S TABLES DE LA LUNE.
4to.
20s.
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
—
Admiralty Publications continued. HARRISON'S PRINCIPLES OF HIS TIME-KEEPER. Plates. 1797.
4to.
5s.
BUTTON'S TABLES OF THE PRODUCTS AND POWERS OF NUMBERS. 1781. Folio. 7s. 6d. LAX'S TABLES FOR FINDING THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE.
8vo.
1821.
105.
LUNAR OBSERVATIONS at GREENWICH. with the Tables, 1821.
4to.
Compared
1783 to 1819.
7s. 6d.
MASKELYNE'S ACCOUNT OF THE GOING OF HARRISON'S WATCH. 1767. 4to. 2s. 6^. MAYER'S DISTANCES of the MOON'S CENTRE from the PLANETS.
1824 to 1835, 8vo.
1822, 3s.; 1823, is. Sd.
4s.
each.
THEORIA LUN^ JUXTA SYSTEMA NEWTONIANUM. 4to.
2s. 6d.
TABULiE MOTUUM SOLIS ET LUN^. 1770. 4to. 5s. ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS MADE AT GOT-
TINGEN,
from 1756
to 1761.
NAUTICAL ALMANACS, from
Folio.
1826.
1767 to 1871.
7s. 6d.
8vo.
2s. 6d.
each.
SELECTIONS FROM THE ADDITIONS up
8vo.
to 1812.
1.S34-54.
5s.
8vo.
5s.
SUPPLEMENTS, Svo.
2s.
TABLE Svo.
1781.
1828 to 1833, 1837 and 1838
each. requisite to be uced with the N.A.
5s.
POND'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS.
1811 to 1835. 4to. 21s.
each.
RAMSDEN'S ENGINE 4to.
Dividing
for
Mathematical
I.n'stbuments.
5s.
ENGINE
for
Dividing Straight Lines.
PENDULUM EXPERIMENTS
SABINE'S
OF THE Earth.
1825.
SHEPHERD'S TABLES Royal
4to.
4to.
for
to
4to.
5s.
Determine the Figure
40s.
Cobbecting Lunar Distances.
1772.
21s.
TABLES, GENERAL, of the MOON'S DISTANCE STARS. 1787. Folio. 6s. 6d. TAYLOR'S SEXAGESIMAL TABLE. 1780. 4to. 15s. TABLES OF LOGARITHMS. 4to. 3^. TIARK'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS for the Longitude from the SUN, and 10
of
Madeira.
1822.
4to.
5s.
CHRONOMETRICAL OBSERVATIONS
of
for Differences Longitude between Dovkk, Portsmouth, and Falmouth. 1823.
4to.
VENUS
5s.
and
JUPITER: Observations
London, 1822.
4to.
of,
compared with the Tables.
2s.
WALES' AND BAYLY'S ASTRONOMICAL 1777.
4to.
OBSERVATIONS.
21s.
WALES' REDUCTION OF ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS MADF.
IN
THE SoUTUKBM HeMISI'UKKK.
1764—1771.
1788.
10s. 6i.
B 2
Ito.
LIST OF
BAEBAULD'S
(Mrs.)
OrJgiual Desigus.
BARROW'S
Small
Drake.
With 112
in Prose for Children.
4to.
5s.
;
or
Fme
Paper,
Is.
Qd.
From Early
(Sir John) Autobiographical Memoir. Advanced Age. Portrait. 8vo. 16s.
Life to
BARRY'S
Hymns
WORKS
(John) Life, Exploits, and Yoj-ages of Sir Francis With numerous Original Letters. Post Svo. 2a'.
With
By Alfred Barry, D.D. (Sir Charles) Life. and Illustrations. Medium Svo. 24s.
Portrait,
BATES'
Amazons
(H. W.) Records of a Naturalist on the River
during eleven years of Adventure and Travel. Post Svo. 12s.
Second Edition.
Illus-
trations.
BEAUCLERK'S
(Lady Di) Summer
Second Edition.
BEES j
I
With
AND FLOWERS.
and Winter in Xorway. Small Svo.
Illustrations.
6s.
Essays. By Rev. Thomas James. Reprinted from the " Quarterly Keview." Fcap. Svo. Is. each.
Two
Journal during a Visit to her Uncle in England. Containing a Variety of 1 nteresting and Instructive Information. Seventh Edition. Woodcuts. 12mo. 7*. 6i/.
BERTHA'S
BERTRAM'S
a Contribution to the (Jas. G.) Harvest of the Sea Natural and Economic History of British Food Fishes. Second and Cheaper Edition. With 50 Illustrations. Svo.
I
:
BICKMORE'S pelago.
;
(Albert S., M.A.) Travels in the East Indian ArchiWith Maps and Illustrations. Svo. {In vreparation.) of Ancient
BIRCH'S (Samuel) History
I
Pottery and Porcelain
Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, Roman, and Etruscan.
i
2 Vols.
lions.
I
Medium
Svo.
:
With 200 Illustra-
42s.
of the Commonwealth of England, from the Death of Charles I. to the Expulsion of the Long Parliament the MSS. in the State Paper Office. 2 vols. from Chiefly CroniwfcU. hy
BISSET'S (Andrew) History Svo.
I
30s,
(Capt.) Narrative of the Expedition sent to exUpper Waters of the Yang-Tsze. Illustrations. Svo. ISs.
BLAKISTON'S plore the
I
BLOMFIELD'S j
Bpondence.
BLUNT'S
(Rev.
(Bishop) Memoir, with Selections from his Corre-
By
Second Edition.
his Son.
J. J.)
Portrait, post Svo.
12s.
Undesigned Coincidences in the Writings of
the Old and NewTestament, an Argument of their Veracity containing the Books of Moses, llistoiical and Prophetical Sciiptures, and the Ninth Edition. Post Svo. 6s. Gospels and Acts. :
I
History of the Church in the First Three Centuries. I
T?iird Edition.
— —
Post Svo.
7s. 6d.
Parish Priest; His Duties, Acquirements and Obliga-
tions.
Fourth Edition.
Lectures on
Second Edition.
Svo.
Post Svo.
the
7s. 6d.
Right Use
of
the
Early Fathers.
15s.
Pljiin Sermons Preached to a Country Fifth and Cheaper Edition. 2 Vols. Post Svo.
—
Essays on various subjects.
Svo. 12«.
Congregation.
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
BOOK OP COMMON PRAYER.
;illustrated with A new edition. Borders, Initial Letters, and Woodcuts. cloth
Coloured 8vo.
ISs.
morocco,
Sls.tJJ. calf; 36«.
;
BORROWS
(George) Bible in Spain; or the Journeys, Adventures, and Imprisonments of an Englishman in an Attempt to circulate the 3 Vols. Tost 8vo. 27*.
Scriptures iu the Peninsula.
16mo,
;
or Popular Editioii,
3s. Qd.
Zincali, or the Gipsies of Spain ; their Manners, Customs, Religion, and Language. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. \S3.\ qt Popular 16mo, ds. Qd.
Edition,
Wales
"Wild
Lavengro
;
The Scholar Post 8vo.
3 Vols.
Portrait.
Romany Rye Edition.
2 Vols.
BOSWELL'S 8vo.
BRACE'S Svo.
lo
Sequel
a
;
— The
Postbvo.
Gipsy
6s.
—and the
Priest.
30s.
Post 8vo.
(James) Life
ing the Tour
Language, and Scenery.
People,
its
:
AVith Introductory Kemarks.
Tliird Edition.
of
to
Second
Lavengro.
21s.
Samuel Johnson, LL.D.
Includ-
the Hebrides. Edited by Mr. CnoKER. Portraits. Royal
10s.
L.)
(C.
History of the Races of the Old World.
Post
9s.
BRAY'S
With Personal (Mrs.) Life of Thomas Stothard, R.A. Reminiscences. Illustrated with Portrait and 60 Woodcuts of his chief works. 4to. 21s.
BREWSTER'S Galileo,
(Sir David) Martyrs of Science; or, Lives of Tycho Brahe, and Kepler. Fourth Edition. Fcap. 8vo. is. M. lilore
Worlds than One.
sopher and the Hope of the Christian.
to
of the PhiloPost 8vo.
&s.
History, Theory, Construction, the Arts and to Education. Woodcuts. Vlmo.
Stereoscope and Application
The Creed Eighth Edition.
:
its
5s. Qd.
Kaleidoscope: with its application Woodcuts. Post 8vo.
its
to the 5s.
History, Theory, and Construction, Fine and Useful Arts. Second Edition.
M.
BRITISH ASSOCIATION REPORTS. York and Oxford,
1831-32, 13s. &d. Cambridge, 1833, 12s. Edinburgli, 1834, 15s. Dublin, 1S35, 13s. M. Bristol, 1836, 12s. Liverpool, 1837, 16s. Qd. Kewcastle, 1838, 15s. Birmingham, 1839, 13s. 6d Glasgow, 1840, 15s. Plymouth, 1841, 13s. 6J. Manchester, 1842, 10s. 6i. Cork, 1843, 12s. York, 1844, 20s. Cambridge, 1845, 12s. Southampton, 1S46, 15s. Oxford, 1H47, 18<.
Swansea, 1848,
9,<.
Birmingham, 1819,10s.
8vo. Edinburgh, 1850,
15s.
Ipswich, 1851, 16s.
Belfast, lSo2, 15s. Hull, 1853, 10s. Qd. Liverpool, 1854, 18s.
Glasgow,
1855.
1.55.
Cheltenluim, 1856, 18». Dublin, 1857, 1.5s. Leeds. 1858. 20*. Aberdeen. 1859, 15s. Oxford, 1860. 25s. Manchester, 1861, ISs.
Cambridge,
18(52, 20s.
NewcastiH, 1863, 25s. Bath. 1864. 18*.
Birmingham,
1S65. 25s. 21s.
Nottingham, 18'i'i, Dundee, 1S67, -'^s.
WORKS
LIST OF
BROUGHTOIf'S
Journey through Albania and
(Lord)
other
Provinces of Turkey in Europe and Asia, to Constantinople, 1809—10. Thh-.l Edition. Illustrations. 2 Vols. 8vo. 30s.
Visits to Italy. Zrd Edition. 2yol8. PostSvo. 185.
BRCWNLOWS From
(Lady)
Eeminiscences
the year 1802 to 1815,
of a Septuagenarian. PostSvo. 7s. 6d.
Third Edition.
BUBBLES FROM THE BRUNNEN OF NASSAU. Francis B. Head, Bart.
By Sir Post 8vo.
1th Eli lion, with Illustrations.
7s. Gd.
BUNYAN
(John) and Oliver Cromwell. ROBEBT SODTHEY. PoSt 8vO. 2s.
BURGON'S
(Rev.
W.)
J.
Patrick Fraser Tytler.
Select Biographies.
Christian Gentleman Second Edition.
Rome.
Letters from
Post Svo.
Post Svo.
;
or,
By
Memoir
of
95.
125.
BURN'S
(Col.) Dictionary of Naval and Military Technical Terms, English and French— French and English. Fourth Edition.
Crown
BUXTON'S
Svo.
15s.
(Charles) Memoirs of Sir Thomas Fowell Buxton, With Selections from his Correspondence. By his Son. Portrait.
Bart. Svo. 16s.
Or ropidar
BYRON'S
Day
6 Vols.
Life, Portraits.
Svo.
Fcap. Svo.
Letters, Royal Svo.
Analysed and
6s.
By Thomas Moorf.
18s.
and
By Thomas Moore.
Journals.
9s.
Poetical Works.
—
25. 6a.
on Policy,
(Lord) Life, Letters, and Journals.
Plates.
Svo.
Fcap. bvo.
Edition.
Ideas of the Abkanged. Third Edition.
Llhrai'ii Edition.
6 Yols.
Portrait.
455.
Works.
Plates.
10 Vols.
Poetical Works.
8 Yols.
24mo.
Poetical
Poetical
Works.
Plates.
Poetical
Works.
(Pearl Edition.)
Childe Harold.
Childe Harold.
Childe Harold.
16mo.
Tales and Poems.
2 Vols.
Plays.
28.
Portrait.
Is.
Qd.
M.
24mo.
Fcap.
6s.
24mo.
2 Vols.
5s.
24mo.
Svo,
Svo.
Crown
2s. Qd.
2 Vols.
Don Juan and Beppo. Beauties.
16mo.
24mo.
305.
9s.
Crown
16mo.
Vignettes. Portrait.
Dramas and
Royal Svo.
With SO Engravings.
Childe Harold.
Miscellaneous.
Fcap. Svo. 20s.
3.s.
5s.
6i.
25.
Svo.
Qd.
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. (G. D.) Instructions in Practical Surveying, Topographical Plan Drawing, and on sketching ground without Instniments. Fourth Edition. Woodcuts, PostSvo. 6s.
BURR'S
BUTTMAN'S LEXILOGUS; Meaning
of
a Critical Examination of the numerous Greek Words, cliiefly in Homer and Hesiod.
Translated by Kev. J. R. Fisulake.
8vo.
Fifth Edition.
12s.
CATALOGUE OF IRREGULAR GREEK VERBS.
^
With all the Tenses extant— their Formation, Meaning, and Usage, accompanied by an Index. Translated, with Notes, by R«v. J. R. FisHLAKE. Fijth Edition. Revised by Rev. E. Venables. Post 8vo. 6s.
CALLCOTT'S
(Lady) Little Arthur's History of England. Nao Edition, Irouyht down to IS32. With Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 2s. 6d.
CAMPBELL'S
(Lord) Lives of the Lord Chancellors and Keepers
of the Great Seal of England. From the Earliest Times to the Death of Lord Eldon in 1838. Fourth Edition. 10 Vols. Crown Svo. 6s. each.
Lives of the Chief Justices of England. From the to the Death of Lord Tenterden. Second Edition.
Norman Conquest 3 Vols. 8vo.
42s.
Legal
Shakspeare's Svo.
Acquirements
Considered,
6s. 6d.
Life of
Lord Chancellor Bacon.
Fcap. Svo.
2s.
6d.
(George) Modern India. A Sketch of the System Government. With some Account of the Natives and Native
of Civil Institutions.
Second Edition.
India as it Government and Policy.
Svo.
may
be.
Svo,
12s.
16s.
An
Outline of a proposed
With an
(Thos.) Short Lives of the British Poets. Essay on English Poetry. Post Svo. 3s. 6d.
CARNARVON'S
(Lord)
Portugal,
Provinces. From Notes Third Edition. Post Svo.
and
Gallicia,
made during a Journey
the
Recollections of the Druses of Lebanon.
CASTLEREAGH
(The)
Basque
to those Countries.
3s. 6d.
DESPATCHES,
With
from the commencement
of the official career of the late Viscount Castlereagh to tlie close of his life. Edited by the Marquis OF LoNDOXDERKY. 12 Vols. Svo. 14s. each.
CATHCART'S
(Sir George) Commentaries on the and Germany, 1812-13. Plans. Svo. 14s.
CAVALCASELLE
and
CROWE'S
History
War
in Russia
Painting
of
in
Italy, from the Second to the Sixteenth Century, from recent researches, as well as from personal inspection of tlie Works of Art in that Country. With 100 Illustrations. 3 Vols. Svo. 63s.
ing Venice,
History of Painting in North Ita'y, includLombardy, Padua, Vicenzn, Verona, Parma, Friuli,
Ferrara, and Bologna.
With
Illustrations. 2 Vols. Svo. {In lirrjmration.)
Notices of the Lives and Early Flemish Painters.
Woodcuts.
Post Svo.
Works
125.
of the
CHILD
(G, Chaplin, M.D.) Benedicite; or, Song of the Three Children beinj? Illustrations of the Power, Wisdom, and Goodness of the Creator. 2\€W and Cheaiier Edition. Post 8vo. ;
CHURTON'S
An
(Archdeacon) Gongora.
Age of Philip III. and IV. of Spain. 2 Vols. Small 8vo. ISv.
Historical Essay on the
With
Translations.
Portrait.
AND
CICERO'S LIFE
TIMES. With his Character viewed as a Statesman, Orator, and Friend, and a Selection from his Correspondence and Orations. By William Forsyth, Q.C. J^^txo Edition. With
8vo.
Illustrations.
IG5.
CLIYE'S (Lord)
Life.
By Rev.
COLCHESTER
(The)
PAPERS.
G. R. Gleiq,
M.A. Post 8vo.
of Charles Abbott, Lord Colchester, Speaker of the 1802-1817. Portrait. 3 Vols. 8vo. 42s.
COLERIDGE'S (Samuel Taylor) Fcap. 8vo.
Portrait.
Zs. 6c?.
The Diary and Correspondence of
Commons,
New
Edition.
House
Table-Talk.
6s.
COLLING WOOD'S
(Cuthbert) Rambles of a Naturalist on the Shores and Waters of the Cliina Sea. Being Observations in Natural History during a Vovage to China, Formosa, Borneo, Singapore, &c., during 1866—67. With Illustrations. 8vo. 16s.
COLONIAL LIBRARY. COOK'S
[See
Home
Sermons Preached
(Canon)
and on Special Occasions.
8vo.
and Colonial Library.] at
Lincoln's
Inn Chapel,
9s.
COOKERY
(Modern Domestic). Founded on Principles of Economy and Practical Knowledge, and adapted for Private Families. By a Lady. New Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. 8vo. 5s.
CORNWALLIS
(The) Papers and Correspondence during the American War, Administrations in India, Union with Ireland, and
—
Peace of Amiens.
COWPER'S
—
Second Edition.
3 Vols.
8vo.
63*.
(Mary, Countess) Diary while Lady of the Bedchamber
to Caroline Princess of
CowPER.
CRABBE'S
Wales, 1714-20.
Second Edition.
(Rev.
8vo.
Edited by Hon. Spenceb 10s. 6d.
George) Life and Poetical Works.
Fcap. 8vo.
8 vols.
Portrait.
24s.;
or Complete in 1 Vol.
Plates.
Plates.
Koyal
8vo. 7s.
CREE'S
(E. D.) Portrait of the Primitive Church.
CROKER'S
(J.
Fifth Edition.
W.)
Progressive
18mo.
Geography
Fcap. 8vo. for
1^.
Children.
Is. 6d.
Stories for Children, Selected from the History England. Fifteenth Edition. Woodcuts. IGmo. 2s. 6d.
Boswell's the Hebrides.
Life
Portraits.
of Johnson. Including the Royal 8vo. 10s.
Tour
of
to
Essays on the Early Period of the French Revolution. Bvo.
15s.
Historical Essay on the Guillotine.
CROMWELL Post8vo.
(Oliver) and John Bunyan. 2s.
Fcap. 8vo.
I5.
By Robert Southky.
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. CRO^YE'S AND CAVALCASELLE'S Notices Woodcuts.
Painters.
Post 8vo.
of the Early Flemish
12s.
History of Painting in Italy, from 2nd to 16ih Century. Derived from Historical Re-*PHri.iiPs as well as Inspection of 3 Vols. the Woiks of Art in that Country. With 100 Illustrations. 8vo. 21s. each.
Xorth Italy, including Venice, Lombardy, Padua, Vicenzi, Verona, Parma, FriuH, Ferrara, and Bologna. With Illustrdtions. 2 Vols. 8vo. {In pvpirntiou.)
CUMMIXG'S
(R. Gordon) Five Years of a Hunter's Life in the Far Interior of South Africa; with Anecdotes of the Chace, and Notices Xeio Edidon. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 5s. of the Native Tribes.
CUNNIXGHAM'S
(Allan) Poems and Songs.
and arranged, with Biographical Notice.
lected
CURTIUS'
Now
2-4mo.
first col-
2s. 6d.
Student's Greek Grammar, for Colleges Edited by De. Wji. Smith. Third Edition.
(Professor)
and the Upper Forms. Post Svo. 6s.
Grammar
Smaller Greek Forms.
CURZON'S
for the
Middle and Lower
12mo. 3s 6d.
A
(Hon. Robert) Armenia and Erzeroum.
the Frontiers of Russia, Turkey, and Persia. cuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d.
Post Svo.
7s.
Wood-
Fifth Edition.
Visits to the, jMonaateries of the Levant. Illustrations.
Year on
Third Edition.
6d.
of the 17th Century— The Thirty Years' War— and the Civil Wars of France and England. 4 Vols. Post Svo.
GUST'S (General) Warriors 8s.
each.
fnm
Compiled
—
ISth &19th Century, 1700— 1815. mast Authentic Sources. With Maps. 9 Vols. Post
Annals of the Wars the
Svo. 5s. each.
DARWIN'S
(Charles) Journal of Researches into the Natural History of the Countries visited during a Voyage round the World. Post Svo. 9s. Origin of Species by Means of Natural
or,
Selection
the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Post 8vo. 15*.
;
Fourth
Edition, revised.
Fertilization of Orchids through Insect Woodcuts. Post 8vo.
as to the good of Intercrossing.
Agency, and 9s.
Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication.
With
Illustrations.
2 Vols.
Svo.
Fact and Argument
2Ss.
for.
By Fritz Muller.
numerous
Illu.strations and Additions by the Author. the German by W. S. Dallas. Svo. {Nearly rtadij.)
DAVIS'S
(Nath-^n)
Carthaginia.
Visit
to the
Illustratior<s.
Svo.
Ruined
Cities of
With
Translated from
Numidia and
16s.
(Sir J. F.) Chinese Miscellanies: a Collection of Essays and Notes. Post Svo. 6s.
DAVY'S
(Sir
Humphry) Consolations
of a Philosoplier.
Salmonia Woodcuts.
Fifth Edition. ;
or,
Fcap. Svo.
in Travel; or, Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo.
Days of Fly Fishing. 6s.
Last Days 6s.
Fourth Edition.
WORKS
LIST OF
10
DELEPIERRE'S
From
(Octave) History of Flemisli Literature.
the Twelfth Century.
8vo.
9*.
Events. Difficulties and Contested some Doubtful Points of History. Post 8vo. 6s. DENISON'S (E. B.) Life of Bishop Lonsdale, D.D. With Selections from his Writings. With Portrait. Crown Svo. lOa. 6J. Historical
Bein;? Notes on
(Earl of) Translation of the Iliad of Homer into English Blank Verse. Fifth Lihrarij Edition, 2 vols. 8vo. 24<. or Seventh with Translations from the Poets, Ancient and Modern. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 10s, %* Translations from the Poets, may be had separately. 8vo, 3s. M.
DEEBY'S
;
Editio7i,
DE
ROS'S (Lord) Memorials With
Edition.
Young
Tower
of the
Crown
Illustrations.
8vo.
Companion
Officer's
;
of London.
Second
12s.
Essays on Military
or,
Duties and Qualities with Examples and Illustrations from History. New Edition. Post Bvo. :
DIXON'S
(W. Hepworth) Story of the Life of Lord Bacon. Second Fcap. Svo.
Portrait.
Edition.
DOG-BREAKING
7s.
Gd.
Most Expeditious,
Certain, and Easy Method, whether great excellence or only mediocrity be required. With Love the Dog for who and the Gun. By Lieut.Few Hints those a Gen. Hutchinson. Fourth Edition. With 40 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 15s.
the
;
DOMESTIC MODERN COOKERY. Economy and
New
DOUGLAS'S
(Sir
FuLLOM.
Founded on Principles
Practical Knowledge, and adapted Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 5s.
Edition.
Howard) 8vo.
Portrait.
Life
and Adventures.
By
W.
Plates.
21s.
Third Edition. Naval Warfare with Steam. Svo.
Military Bridges.
Modern Systems
DRAKE'S
S.
15s.
Theory and Practice of Gunnery. Fifth Edition. Svo.
of
for Pi'ivate Families.
Plates. 8s.
Plans.
of Fortification.
Svo. 2l5.
Qd. Svo. 12s.
(Sir Francis) Life, Voyages, and Exploits, by Sea
By John Barrow.
Land.
DRINKWATER'S
(John)
Third Edition.
Post 8vo.
and
2s.
History of
1779-1783. With a Description and Earliest Periods. Post Svo. 2s.
DU CHAILLU'S
the Siege of Gibraltar, Account of that Garrison from the
EQUATORIAL
AFRICA, with (Paul B.) Accounts of the Gorilla, the Nest-building Ape, Chimpanzee, Crocodile,
&c.
Illustrations.
Svo.
21s.
Journey to Ashango Land tration into Equatorial Africa.
Illustrations.
;
and Further PeneSvo.
21s.
DUFFERIN'S
(Lord) Letters from High Latitudes; an Account of a Yacht Voyage to Iceland, Jan Mayen, and Spitzbergen. Fifth Edition.
DYER'S of
Woodcuts.
Post Svo.
7s. Qd.
(Tnos. H.) History of Modern Europe, from the taking Constantinople by the Turks to the close of the Vv''ar in the
Crimea.
EASTLAKE'S
4 Vols.
Svo.
(Sir Charles) Italian Schools of Painting. the German of Kuglek. Edited, with Notes. Third Edition. trated from the Old Masters. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 30s.
From Illus-
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
EDWAEDS'
(W. H.) Yoyage up the Elver Amazon, including a
Visit to Para.
ELDON'S
11
Post 8vo.
2s.
(Lord) Public and Private Life, with Selections from
By Hobace Twiss.
his Correspondence and Diaries. 2 Vols. Post 8vo. 21s.
Third Edition.
Portrait.
ELLESMEEE'S
Two
(Lord)
Sieges
Translated from the German.
ELLIS'S (W.)
Yisits
of
Post Svo.
Madagascar,
to
Yienna by the Turks. 2s.
including
a
Journey to
the Capital, with notices of Natural History, and Present Civilisation of the People. Fifth Tliousand. Map and Woodcuts. Svo. \6s.
Madagascar Eevisited. Setting forth the Persecutions and HeroicSufferingsof the Native Christians. Illustrations. Svo. IGs. Education of
(Mrs.) Training.
Post Svo.
ELPHINSTONE'S
Character,
(Hon. Mountstuart)
Hindoo and Mahomedan Periods.
EN GEL'S
with Hints on
Moral
75. Qd.
History of India—the Map. Svo. 18s.
Fifth Edition.
(Carl) Music of the Most Ancient Nations; particularly
of the Assyrians^ Egyptians, and Hebrews; with Special Reference to the Discoveries in Western Asia and in Egypt. With 100 Illustrations. Svo. 16s.
ENGLAND
(History of) from the Peace of Utrecht to the Peace
of Versailles, 1713—83. By Lord Mahon fnow Earl Stanhope). Library Edition,! Vols. Svo. 93s.; or Popular Fditioi, 7 \ols. Post 8vo. 35s.
From
the First Invasion by the Eomans.
Markham. New and 12mo.
Cheaper Edition, continued
—
From tion of 1688.
By Mrs. Woodcuts.
the Invasion of Julius Coesar to the Eevolu-
By David Hume.
Edited by Wii. Smitu, LL.D.
Edition, contirmed
Arthur
Little continued
to
to
1862.
ENGLISHWOMAN
s.
By Wm.
of).
Woodcuts.
1865.
Woodcuts.
Corrected and continued to 1S5S. Post Svo. 7s. 6d.
Woodcuts.
History
(Smaller
New
to 1863.
4s.
By Lady 18mo.
and English Yocabulary, Regions. 16mo. 3s. M.
Smith, 3?.
Callcott.
LL.D.
Gd.
Neto Edition,
2s. 6c/.
IN AMEEICA.
ESKIM AUX
ISmo.
Post Svo.
10.^ Qd.
for Travellers in the Arctic
ESSAYS FEOM "THE TIMES."
Being a Selection from the Literary Papers which have appeared in that Journal, 2 vols. Fcap. Svo.
8s.
ETHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY'S TEANSACTIONS. New Scries. Vols.
EXETEE'S the
I.
to VI.
Svo.
10s. Qd. each.
(Bishop of) Letters to Charles Butler, on his Book of
Roman
Catholic Church.
FAMILY EECEIPT-BOOK. A and Useful Receipts.
New
Edition.
Post Svo.
Collection of a
Fcap. Svo.
5s. 6
6s.
Thousand Valuable
WORKS
LIST OF
12
FARRAR'S
Critical History of Free Thought in (A. S.) reference to the Christian lieligion. Being the Bauipton Lectures, 1862. 16s. 8vo.
Language,
(P. W.) Origin of Researches. Fcap. 8vo. 5s.
FERGUSSON'S
(James) Woodcuts.
Restored.
Palaces 8vo.
of
Nineveh
Modern
on
based
and
Persepolis
16.9.
Earliest
History of Architecture in all Countries: from the Times to iho. Present Day. With 1200 Illustrations and au
Index.
Vols,
I.
and
II.
42s each.
8vo.
History of Architecture.
With
Styles.
Vol. HI,
312 Illustrations, and an Index,
— The
8vo.
Modern
31s. 6d.
Holy Sepulchre and the Temple at Jerusalem; being the Substance of Two Lectures delivered at the Royal Instituand '65. Woodcuts. 8vo. 7s. 6d.
tion, 1862
FISHER'S
(Rev. George) Elements of Geometry, for the Use of
Schools.
Fifth Edition.
ISmo.
Is. 6d.
First Principles of Algebra, Fifth Edition. 18mo, Is. 6d.
FLEMING
Use
for the
of
Schools.
(Wm.) Student's Manual of Moral Philosophy.
8vo.
Post
7 s. 6d.
FLOWER GARDEN FONNEREAU'S
(The),
(T,
G.)
By Rev.
Thos. James.
Diary of a Dutiful
Fcap. 8vo.
Son.
Is.
Fcap. 8vo.
4s. 6d.
FORBES'
Yolcanoes, Geysers, and Glaciers.
(C. S.) Iceland; its Post 8vo, 14s.
Illustrations.
FORSTER'S
(John) Arrest of the Five :?,Iembers by Charles the
A
First.
Chapter of English History re-written.
Grand Remonstrance, 1641.
Post 8vo.
With an Essay on
English freedom under the Plantagenet and Tudor Sovereigns. Post 8vo.
Edition.
Sir Portraits.
Second
12s.
John
Eliot:
2 Vols.
Crown
a Biography, 1590—1632. 8vo.
With
30s.
Biographies of Oliver Cromwell, Daniel De Foe, Ihird Edition. Samuel Foote.
Sir Richard Steele, Charles Churchill, Post 8vo. 12s.
FORD'S
(Richard) Gatherings from Spain.
FORSYTH'S from 8vo.
Post 8vo.
3s. 6d.
(William) Life and Times of Cicero. With Selections Correspondence and Orations.
liiM
J^tiu Edilion.
Illustrations.
16s.
FORTUNE'S
(Robert)
of Two Visits to the Third Edition. ^Xood^cuts. 2 Vols.
Post
1853-6. Woodcuts. 8vo.
16s.
Narrative
Countries of China, 1843-52.
Tea
Bvo. 18s.
Third Visit to China.
Yedo and Peking.
With Notices
ture and Trade of China, during a Fourth Visit to 8vo. IQs.
tiaiions.
of the Agriculthat Country. lUus-
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. FOSS' (Edward) Judges
13
With Sketches
of England.
of their
Lives, and Notices of the Courts at Westminster, from the Conquest to the Present Time. 9 Vols. 8vo. 126s.
Tabulas Curiales ; or, Tables of the Superior Courts of "Westminster Hall. Siiowing the Judges who sat in them from 1066 to 1864 with the Attorne? and Solicitor Generals of eacli reign. T.) which is pretixed an Alpliabetical List of all the Judgns during the same period. 8vo. 10s. 6d. ;
FRANCE
{History
From
of).
Xcw
By
Mrs. Markiiam. cuts. 12mo, 4s.
aii.1
Conquest
the
by the Gauls,
Cheaper Edition, continued
to 1356.
Wood-
From the Earliest Times to the Establishment of the P.y W. IL Peaksox. Second Empire, 1S52. Edited by Wii. SMrru, LL.D. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 7s. Gd.
FRENCH
(The) in Algiers The Soldier of the Foreign Legion— and the Prisoners of ALd-el-Kadir. Translated by Lady Duff Gobdon. ;
Post 8vo.
FRERE'S
2s.
Old Deccan Days
(M.)
;
or,
Hindoo
Fairy
Legend?
Illustrated Curr-jntin Southern India. Collected from Oral Tradition. by C. F. FuERE. With an Introduction and Notes, by Sir Bartle Frere. Crown 8vo. 12s.
GALTON'S
(Francis) Art of Travel ; or, Hints on the Shifts and Contrivances available in Wild Countries. Fourth Edition. WoodPost 8vo. 7s. Qd.
cuts.
GEOGRAPHY
(Ancient).
Post 8vo.
7s. &d.
Post Svo.
In the Press.
(Modern). Journal LoHdon.
12mo.
Rev.
W.
L. Beyan.
Woodcuts.
By
Rev.
W.
L. Bevan.
"VYoodcuts.
of the
Royal Geographical Society of
Svo.
GERMANY (History of). By
times.
By
From
Mrs. Markhau.
the Invasion by Marius, to Recent Woodcuts.
2sew and Cheapur Edition.
As.
GIBBON'S (Edward)
History of the Decline and Fall of the
Nsto Edition. Preceded by his Autobiography. And Edited, with Notes, by Dr. Wm. Smith. Maps. 8 Vols. 8vo. 60s.
Poman Empire. A
(The Student's Gibbon) ; Being an Epitome of the above work, incorporating the Researches of Recent Commentators. By Dr. Wm. Smith. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. GIFFARD'S (Edward) Deeds of Naval Daring; or, Anecdotes of the British Navy. Fcap. Svo. 3s. 6d.
GLADSTONE'S and G4 Svo.
(W. E.) Financial Statements of 1853, 60, G3, with Speeches on Tax-Bills and Cbaritics. Second Edition.
;
12s.
— Edition.
GLEIG'S
_
and
Speeches
Post Svo.
on
Parliamentary
Reform.
(G. R.) Campaigns of the British New Orleans. Post Svo. 2s.
Story of the Battle of Waterloo.
Army
at
Post Svo.
Narrative of Sale's Brigade in AfTghanistan. Life of Robert Sir
Third
5s,
Lord
Clive.
Thomas Munro.
Post Svo. Post Svo.
Washington 3s. Gd.
Post Svo.
3s. 6d. 3^. Gd.
2*'.
|
WORKS
LIST OF
14
GOLDSMITH'S
A New
(Oliver) Works.
Notes by Peter Cunningham.
GONGORA An ;
4 Vols.
8vo.
30s.
on the Times of Philip HI. and With Illustrations. B7 Archdeacon Churton. Por-
Historical Essay
IV. of Spain. trait.
Edited with
Edition.
Vignettes.
Post 8ro.
2 vols.
15s.
Alex. Duff) Sketches of German L-ife, and Scenes from the War of Liberation. From the German. Post 8vo. 33. 6d.
GORDON'S
(Sir
—
(Lady Duff) Amber- Witch From the German. Post Svo. 2s.
craft.
—
French in Algiers. 2. The Prisoners of
Legion. Post Svo.
GOUGER'S
The
Witch-
for
Trial
Soldier of the Foreign
From the French.
Abd-el-Kadir.
2s.
(Henry) Personal Narrative of Two Years' Imprison-
ment in Burmah.
GRAMMARS Edward
GREECE
1.
A
:
Woodcutg.
Second Edition.
(Latin and Greek).
Post Svo.
See Curtius
12s.
Smith
;
(History of). From the Earliest Times to the By Wm. Smith, LL.D. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s.
Roman
Conquest.
(Smaller History 16mo.
cuts.
GRENVILLE
King
;
VIth., &c. &c.
6d.
By Wm. Smith, LL.D.
of).
Wood-
3s. 6d.
(The)
PAPERS.
Being the Public and Private
Correspondence of George Grenville, including his Private Diary. Edited by W. J. Smith, i Vols. Svo. 16s. each.
GREY'S
Correspondence with King William lYth. and
(Earl)
Sir Herbert Taylor, from November, 1830, to the Passing of the Act in 1832. 2 Vols. Svo. 30s.
Parliamentary
Government
and
Suggestions for the Improvement of our Second Edition. Svo. 9s.
(Sir
George)
GRUNER'S
the
New
Zealand Race.
and
(George) History of Greece.
with
Ancient
Woodcuts.
(Lewis) Terra-Cotta Architecture of
From careful Drawings and Restorations. With and printed in Colours. Small folio. 51. 5s.
GROTE'S
;
Representative System.
Mythology,
Polynesian
Traditional History of Svo. lOs.ed.
Reform
Reform
North
Illustrations,
From
Post Italy,
engraved
the Earliest Times
to the close of the generation contemporary with the death of the Great. Fourth Edition. Maps. 8 Vols. Svo, 112s.
Alexander
Plato, and the other Companions of Socrates. Second Edition.
(Mrs.)
3 Vols.
Memoir
Svo.
of
Ary
45s.
Scheffer.
Post Svo.
85. 6cl.
GUIZOT'S
(M.) Meditations on Christianity, and on the Religious Questions of the Day. Part I. The Essence. Part II. The Present
State.
2 Vols.
Post Svo.
20s.
Meditations on Chri.vtianity. to the State of Society
(Nearly Beady.)
Part
and Progress of the
III.
Human
Its
Relation
Mind.
Post Svo.
—
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
HALLAM'S
15
(Henry) Constitutional History of England, from the
Accession of Henry the Seventh to the Death of George the Second. 3'Vols. Svo.
Seventh Edition.
History
Svo.
3 Vols.
Tenth Edition.
30s.
Europe
of
during
An
The Student's Hallam. of Enrope during the Middle Ages.
By Wm. Smith, LL.D.
trations.
dent's
Hume."
the
Middle
Ages.
305.
Epitome of the History
With Additional Notes and IllusPost Svo, Uniform with the " Stu-
{In Fnparation.)
Literary History of Europe, during the 15th, 16th and 17th Centuries. Fourth Edition. 3 Vols.
—
Svo.
36s.
—
Containing History of England, Historical Works. —Middle Ages of Europe,— Literary History of Europe. 10 Vols. Post Svo.
each.
6s.
(Arthur) Eemains Memoir, and Portrait.
face,
HAMILTON'S tions.
in Yerse and Prose. ; Fcap. Svo. 7*. 6d.
"With Pre-
(James) "Wanderings in North Africa. "With Illustra-
Post Svo.
12s.
HANNAH'S
(Rev. Dr.) Bampton Lectures for 1863; the Divine and Human Elements in Holy Scripture. Svo. 10s. Gi.
HART'S AEMY LIST. (Quarterly and Annually.) Svo. HAY'S (J. H. Drummonr) Western Barbary, its "Wild Tribes and Savage Animals.
Post Svo.
2s.
HEAD'S (Sir Francis) Horse andhis Rider.
Woodcuts. PostSvo.
Rapid Journeys across the Pampas. Bubbles from Post Svo.
^the
Brunnen
Ecap. Svo.
Stokers and Pokers PostSvo.
Illustrations.
;
2s. 6d.
or,
the
London and North Western
2s.
(Sir
Edmund)
Shall
Verbs.
Fcap. Svo.
4s.
HEBER'S
Nassau.
53.
2s.
7*. 6d.
Emigrant. lUilway.
of
Post Svo.
and Will;
Future
or.
Auxiliary
(Bishop) Journey through the Upper Provinces of India, to Bombay, with an Account of a Journey to Madras
from Calcutta
aud the Southern Provinces.
Twelfth Edition.
2 Vols.
Poetical Works, including Palestine, Sea,
Hymns, &c.
Hymns Year.
16mo.
HERODOTUS.
Sixth Edition.
Portrait.
Post Svo.
74.
Europe, The Red
Ecap. Svo.
6s.
adapted to the Weekly Church Service of the Is.
6d.
A New
English
Torsion.
Edited, with
Notes
and Essays, historical, etlinograpliical, and geographical, by Kev. G. Ravvlinson, assisted by Sm Henhy Uawlinson and Sir J. G. Wilkinson. Second Edition. Maps and Woodcuts. 4 Vols. Svo. 4Ss.
WORKS
LIST OF
16
FOREIGN HANDBOOKS. HAND-BOOK— TRAVEL-TALK. Italian.
18mo.
English, French, German, and
3s. 6d.
NORTH GERMANY,— Holland, ani the Rhine from Holland
sia,
to
SOUTH GERMANY,
Belgium, Prus-
Map.
Switzerland.
Post Svo.
10s.
Bavaria,
Austria, Styria, Salzberg, the Austrian and Bavarian Alps, the Tyrol, Hungary, and the Danube, from Ulm to the Black Sea. Map. Post Svo. 10s.
— KNAPSACK GUIDE TO THE TYROL.
Post Svo.
6s.
PAINTING. German, Woodcuts, 2 Vols. Post Svo.
Flemish, and Dutch Schools.
24s.
LIVES OF THE EARLY FLEMISH PAINTERS. By Crowe and Cavalcaselle.
SWITZERLAND, Maps.
Post Svo.
Post Svo.
Illustrations.
12s.
Alps of Savoy, and Piedmont.
10s.
KNAPSACK GUIDE TO SWITZERLAND.
Post
Svo.
FRANCE, Normandy,
Brittany, the French Alps,
the Rivers Loire, Seine, Rhone, and Garonne, Dauphine, Provence, and the Pyrenees. Maps. Post Svo. 12s.
CORSICA and SARDINIA. PARIS, and Svo.
%*
its
Maps.
Post Svo.
Map and
Environs.
Plans.
4s.
Post
3s. 6d.
Mueea-e's Plan of Paeis, mounted on canvas.
SPAIN, lonia, Gallicia,
3s 6d.
Andalusia, Ronda, Granada, Valencia, Cata-
Arragon, and Navarre. Maps.
PORTUGAL,
NORTH
Post Svo. {In
Map.
Lisbon, &c.
the Press.)
Post Svo.
9^.
ITALY, Piedmont,
Lombardy, Parma, Modi-ua, and Romagna.
CENTRAL ITALY,
Liguria, Venetia, Map. Post Svo. 12s.
Lucca, Tuscany, Florence, The St. Peter's. Map. Post Svo. 10s.
Marches, Umbiia, and the Patrimony of
ROME AND ITS Environs. Map. Post Svo. 9s. SOUTH ITALY, Two Sicilies, Naples, Pompeii, Hei-culaneum, and Vesuvius.
Map.
Post Svo.
KNAPSACK GUIDE TO
10s.
ITALY.
Post Svo.
6s.
SICILY, Palermo, Messina, and the Ruins
of the
Greek Temples.
PAINTING. Chables Eastlake, R.A.
- LIVES to
Bassano.
Italian Schools. Edited by Sir 2 Vols. Post Svo. 30s.
Woodcuts.
OF ITALIAN PAINTERS,
By Mrs. Jameson.
DENMARK, Maps.
The
Post Svo.
Catania, Syracuse, Etna, Map. Post Svo. 12s.
Portraits.
from Cimabue
Post Svo.
10s.
Sweden, and Norway. Neiv Edilion.
{la Pieparalioti.)
—
rUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
17
HAND-BOOK— KNAPSACK GUIDE TO NORWAY. Post 8vo.
GREECE, and Macedonia.
the Ionian Islands, Albania, Thessaly,
Maps.
TURKEY, •
Map.
5s.
PostSvo.
Maps.
Armenia, Mesopotamia, &c.
EGYPT,
(In prfparatinn.)
Minor,
Asia
Malta,
Post 8vo.
Constantinople,
(//.
pi-rparation.)
Thebes, the Nile, Alexandria, Cairo, the Map. Post 8vo. 15s.
Pyramids, Mount Sinai, &c.
HOLY LAND of Sinai,
Edom, and Syrian
INDIA. Post. Bvo.
Syria and Palestine, Peninsula Maps.
Desert.
— Bombay
Post Bvo.
2 Vols.
Map.
and Madras.
'lis.
2 Vols.
245.
RUSSIA, FiXLAXD.
Maps.
St. Petersburgh, Mo3C3^Y, Post 8vo. 15s.
Poland, and
ENGLISH HANDBOOKS. HAND-BOOK— MODERN LONDON.
Map.
16mo.
8s.
U.
'
WESTMINSTER ABBEY. Woodcuts. 16mo. Is. KENT AND SUSSEX, Canterbury, Dover, RamsChatham, Woolwich, Worthing, Hastings, Lewes, Arundel, &;c. Map.
gate, Sheernes-i, Rochester,
SURREY AND HANTS,
Britihtoii, Chicliester,
PostSvo.
10*-.
Kingston, Croydon, Pel-
Guildford, Winchester, Southampton, Portsmouth, aud Isle of Post 8vo. \0s.
tate,
"Wight. Maps.
WILTS, DORSET,
AND SOMERSET,
Chippenham, Weymouth, Sherborne, Wells, Bath, Map. Post 8vo.
Salisbury, Tduutou,
Bristol,
&c.
DEVON AND CORNWALL,
Exeter, Ilfracombe,
Linton, Sidmouth, Dawlish, Teignmouth, Plymouth, Devonport, Torquay, Lauoceston, Truro, Penzance, Falmoutl),'&c. Maps. PostSvo. 10s.
BERKS, BUCKS,
AND OXOX,
Windsor, Eton,
Reading, Aylesbury, Uxbridge, Wycombe, II.Miley, the City and University of Oxford, and the Desceut of the Thames. Map. Post Svo. 7a-.
Qd.
GLOUCESTER. HEREFORD, and WORCIuSTEK, Cirencester, Cheltenham, Stroud, Tewkesbury, Leominster, Koss, Mai vern, Kidderminster, Dudley, Bromsgrove, Evesliam, Map. Post Svo.
o
^.
>
V
,
,
6s. 6i.
CATHEDRALS OP GLOUCESTER, HEREFORD and WoiiCESTER. Svo.
Illustrations.
2s. Qd. each, or
iti
1 Vol.,
Post
85. Qi.
NORTH AND SOUTH WALES,
Bangor,
Car-
narvon, Beaumaris, Suowdon, Co. way, Menai Straits, Carmarni«»n, Pembroke, Teiby, Swansc I, The Wye, &c. Maps. 2 Vols. PistSvo. Vis. i
DERBY, NOTTS, LEICESTER,
AND STAFFORD,
Matlofk, Bakewell, Ciiatswortb, Tha Peak, Bii.vtmi, llardwick, D^iVa Dale, Ashborne, Southwell, Manslield, Kotford, Burton, Melv.dr, M»lton Mowbray, Wolverhampton, Ltclilield, Walsall, Tamwortli. Map. PostSvo. IsJvl.
YORKSHIRE,
Doncas'er,
Hull,
Sclby,
Bjverley,
S.;arborougb, Wnitliy, llirrogite, Kipon, Leeds, WMkeli,-ll, Br.uiford, Map and Plans. I'ost Svo. lis.
Jlulifax, liuddoralield, Shellield,
LIST OF
IS
WORKS
HAKD-BOOK— DUliHAM AND ^NORTHUMBERLAND,
New-
Darlington, Gateshead, Bishop Auckland, Stockton, Hartlepool, Sunderland, Shields, Berwick-on-Tweed, Morpeth, Tynemouth, Coldstream, Alnwick, &c. Map. Post 8vo. 9s.
castle,
WESTMORLAND
CUMBERLAND— Lan-
and
caster, Furness Abbey, Ambleside, Kendal, Windermere, Coniston, Keswick, Grasmere, Carlisle, Cockermouth, Penrith, Appleby. Map.
Post 8vo, 6s. *»• Murray's
Map
of the Lakes, on canvas.
EASTERN COUNTIES, and Cambridge.
Map,
Post Svo.
Essex,
3s.
Gd.
Suffolk,
Norfolk,
(In the Fress.)
SCOTLAND, Edinburgh, Melrose, Kelso, Glasgow, Dumfries. Ayr, Stirling, Arran, The Clyde, Oban, Inverary, Locli Lomond, Loch Katrine and Trossachs, Caledonian Canal, Inverness, Perth, Dundee, Aberdeen, Braemar, Skye, Caithness, Ross, Sutherland, &c. Maps and Plans. Post Svo. 9s.
IRELAND, Dul-lin, Belflist, Donegal, Galway, Wexford, Cork, Limerick, "VVaterford, the Lakes of Killarney, Coast of Munster, &c. Maps. Post Svo, 12s.
EASTERN CATHEDRALS,
Oxford, Peterborough, Crown Svo. 18s. SOUTHERN CATHEDRALS, Winchester, Salisbury,
Norwich, Ely, and Lincoln.
With
90 Illustrations.
Exeter, Wells, Chichester, Rochester, Canterbury. 2 Vols. Crown Svo. 24s. tions,
With
110 Illustra-
WESTERN CATHEDRALS, Hereford, Worcester, and Lichfield.
With
Bristol, Gloucester, 50 Illustrations. Crown Svo.
16s.
NORTHERN CATHEDRALS, ham, Svo.
Carlisle, Chester, (In preparation.)
and Manchester.
York, Ripon, DurWith Illustrations. Crown
HAND-BOOK OF FAMILIAR QUOTATIONS. From Authors.
Third Edition.
Fcap. Svo.
English
5s.
HESSEY
(Rev. Dr.). Sunday— Its Origin, History, and Present Obligations. Being the Bampton Lectures for 1860. Second Edition. Svo. 16s. Or Popular Edition. Post Svo. 9s.
HICKMAN'S
(Wm.) Treatise on the
Courts-Martial.
Svo.
Law and
Practice of Naval
10s. Qd.
HOLLWAY'S (J. G.) Month in Norway. Fcap. Svo. 25. HONEY BEE (The). An Essay. By Rev. Thomas Reprinted from the " Quarterly Review."
Fcap, Svo.
James.
Is.
HOOK'S
Ninth Edition. Svo. 16s. (Dean) Church Dictionary. (Theodore )Life. By J. G. Lockhart. Fcap. Svo. Is. HOPE'S (A. J. B.) English Cathedral of the Nineteenth Century. With Illustrations. Svo. 12s. HOPE'S (T. C.) ARCHITECTURE OF AHMEDABAD, with Historical Sketch and Architectural Notes by T. C. Hope, and James Fr:ROU8SON, F.R.S. With 2 Maps, 120 Photographs, and 22 Woodcuts. 4to.
U.ba.
BEJAPOOR,
—
with Historical Sketch and Ar-
chitectural Essay by Col. Meadows Taylor and Jas. Fergusson. With 2 Maps, 78 Photographs, and 13 Woodcuts. Folio. 101. 10s.
DHARWAR
and MYSORE. With Historical Sketch and Architectural Essay by Col. Meadows Taylor and Jas. Fergusson. With 2 Maps, 100 Photographs, and numerous Woodcuts. Folio.
121. 125,
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
19
HOME AND COLONIAL LIBRARY. A
Series of Works and classes of Readers, having been selected acknowledged interest and ability of the Authors. Post 8vo. Published at 25. and 3s. 6d. each, and arranged under two distinctive heads as follows :— adapted
for all circles
for their
CLASS 1.
A.
HISTORY, BIOGRAPHY, AND HISTORIC TALES. 11 THE SIEGES OF VIENNA. SIEGE OF GIBRALTAR. By John Drixkwater.
By Lord Ellesmebk. 2s. CROSS.
2s.
THE AMBER-WITCH. Lady Duff Gokdox.
By
THE WAYSIDE
12.
Capt. Milman.
2s.
By
2s.
13.
SKETCHES OF GERMAN LIFE.
LIFE OF Sir FRANCIS DRAKE. By John BAKRO^v, 2s.
14.
THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO.
CAMPAIGNS AT WASHING-
15.
AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF STEP.
5.
THE FRENCH
16.
THE BRITISH POETS.
G.
3.
CROMWELL AND BUNYAN. By Robert Southey.
4.
7.
TON. ByREV.G.R.GLEiG. 2s. IN ALGIERS. By Lady Duff Gordon. 2s. THE FALL OF THE JESUITS.
'
8.
LIVONIAN TALES. 2s. LIFE OF CONDE. ByLOBD Ma-
FENS.
SALE'S BRIGADE. G. R. Gleig.
17.
18.
3*.6d.
2s.
HISTORICAL
By
3s. Gd.
By
ESSAYS.
Lord ^Iahon.
3s. 6d.
LIFE OF LORD CLIVE. Rev. G. R. Gleig.
By
3s. 6d.
19.
NORTH - WESTERN RAILWAY. By Sir F. B. Head. 2s.
20.
LIFE OF MUNRO. By Rev. R. Gleig.
2s.
CLASS
3s. 6d.
Thomas Campbell.
3s. 6d.
By Rev.
Sir A. Gordon,
ByREV.G.R.GLEiG.
2s.
HON. 10.
By
2s.
G.
3s. 6d.
B.
1.
VOYAGES, TRAVELS, AND ADVENTURES. LETTERS FROM MADRAS By BIBLE IN SPAIN. By George
2.
GIPSIES of SPAIN. By George
Borrow.
3&4.
Charles
JOURNALS IN INDIA. By
TRAVELS
IN'
2 Vols.
6.
7.
8.
9.
THE WE.ST Sir
11.
2s
John Malcolm.
2s.
TYPEE AND OMOO.
Hermann Melville. 14.
W.
MISSIONARY LIFE IN CANADA. By Rev.
J. Abbott.
*»*
3s. 6d.
By
2s.
20.
MANNERS & CUSTOMS OF ADVENTURES IN MEXICO.
22,
PORTUGAL AND GALLICIA.
23
BUSH LIFE
24.
THE LIBYAN DESERT.
INDIA. ByREV.C.AcLAND.
By
G. F. RuxTON.
By
Rev.
Baylk 25.
11.
3s. 6d.
AUSTRALIA.
IN
W.
2s.
35. 6J.
By Lord Caunauvon.
By
2 Vols. Is.
H. Edwards.
21
MEMOIRS OF FATHER RIPA.
12. 13.
2s.
THE RIVER AMAZON.
By
3s. 6d.
Sib
19.
INDIES. By M. G.
2s.
SKETCHES OF PERSIA.
Head.
By Richard Ford.
Dbummond Hay. 2s. LETTERS FROM the BALTIC. By a Lady. 2s. NEW SOUTH WALES. By Mrs. Lewis.
10.
F. B.
By
3s. 6d.
GATHERINGS FROM SPAIN.
J.
Mkredith.
John.
18
2s.
MOROCCO AND THE MOORS. By
SPORTS.
St.
PAMPAS JOURNEYS. By
7s.
THE HOLY LAND.
By Irby and Mangles.
2s.
HIGHLAND
3s. 6d.
Bishop Heber. 5.
a Lady.
3s. 6d.
Borrow.
llAyuARTH.
St. John.
SIERRA LEONE.
2s.
By
2s.
By
a Lady.
3s.6ci.
2s.
Each work may be had separately C 2
LIST OF
20
HORACE
(Works
Woodcuts.
HOUGHTON'S
HUME
of.) 8vo.
Edited by
Crown
(Life of). Borders. 8vo.
WORKS Dean Milman.
Woodcuts, and coloured
9s.
(Lord) Poetical Works.
(The Student's)
A
Fcap. 8vo.
Corrected and continued
Wm. Smith. Woodcuts. Post on the most expeditious,
Edited by Dr.
HUTCHINSON
(Gen.) Method of Dog-Breakine:.
easy
6s.
History of England, from the Invasion
of Julius Cfesar to the Kovolution of 1688. to 1858.
With 100
7s. 6d.
By Dean Milman.
revised, with 40 Illustrations.
Crown
Fourth 8vo.
8vo.
7s. 6d.
certain,
and
Enlarged and
Edition.
15s.
BUTTON'S
(H. E.) Principia Grseca ; an Introduction to the Study of Greek. Comprehending Grammar, Delectus, and Exercise-book, with Vocabularies. Sixth Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6(Z.
IRBY AND MANGLES'
Travels in Egypt, Nubia, Syria, and Holy Land. Post 8vo. 2s. JAMES' (Rev. Thomas) Fables of ^sop. A New Translation, with With 100 Woodcuts by Tenniel and Wolf. Historical Preface. the
Post 8vo. 2s. 6i. (Mrs.) Lives of the Early Italian Painters— New Painting in Italy— Cimabue to Bassano. of Progress and the Edition. With 50 Portraits. Post Svo. 10s. Qd. JENNINGS' (L. J.) Eighty Years of Republican Government in the United States. Post 8vo. 10s. 6d. JESSE'S (Edward) Gleanings in Natural History. Eighth Edition. Fcp. 8vo. 6s. JOHNS' (Rev. B. G.) Blind People; their Works and Ways. With Sketches of the Lives of some famous Blind Men. With Illustrations. Post 8vo, 7s. 6(/. (Dr. Samuel) Life. By James Boswell. Including Portraits. Edited by Ma. Ckokeb. the Tour to the Hebrides. Fiftieth Thousand.
JAMESON'S
JOHNSON'S
Koyal 8vo.
10s.
Edited by Peter Lives of the English Poets. Cunningham. 3 vols. 8vo. 22s. M. KEN'S (Bishop) Life. By a Layman. Portrait. 2 Vols. 8vo. 1S6\ Exposition of the Apostles' Creed. Fcap. Is. 6d. Approach to the Holy Altar. Fcap. 8vo. Is. 6d. KENNEDY'S (General) Notes on the Battle of Waterloo. With a Memoir of his Lite and Services, and a Plan for the Defence of Canada. ,
With Map and
Plans.
8vo.
7s. 6d^
(Robert) GENTLEMAN'S HOUSE; or. How to Plan English Residences, from the Parsonage to the Palace. With
KERR'S
—
Tables and Cost.
"Views and Plans.
Ancient Lights;
a
Book
Second Edition. 8vo. 24s. for Architects, Surveyors,
Lawyers, and Landlords. 8vo. 5s. 6d. Systematic (R. Malcolm) Student's Biackstone. Abridgment of the entire Commentaries, adapted to the present state oftbelaw. PostSvo. 7s. 6d. KING'S (Rev. C. W.) Antique Gems; their Origin, Use, and Value, as Interpreters of Ancient History, and as illustrative of Aucient
A
Art.
Second Edition.
KING EDWARD to
Illustrations.
8vo.
24s.
VIth's Latin Grammar;
the Latin Tongue.
First Latin
or,
12ino.
Seventeenth Edition.
Book;
an Introduction 3s. 6d.
or,
the Accidence,
Syntax, and Prosody, with an English Translation. Fifth Edition. 12mo. 2s. 6d.
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
21
KING GEORGE THE THIRD'S CORRESPONDENCE WITH
LORD NORTH, 1769-82. Edited, with Notes and Introduction bv W. BoDnAM DoN.NK. 2 vols. Sro. 32s. KIRK'S (J. Foster) History of Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy.
Portrait.
3 Vols.
8vo.
45«.
KUGLER'S
Italian Schools of Painting. Sir Charles Eastlake. Third Edition.
Svo.
Edited, with Notes, by Woodcuts. 2 Vols. Post
30s.
German, Dutch, and Flemish Schools of Painting. Waaoek. Second Edition. Woodcuts. "2
Edited, with Notes, by Da. \ols. PostSvo. 24s.
LA YARD'S
Nineveh and
H.)
(A.
its
Remains.
Being a Nar-
rative of Researches and Discoveries amidst tlie Ruins of Assyria. With an Account of the Chaldean Christians of Kurdistan the Yezedis, or Devil-worshippers; and an Enquiry into the Manners and Arts of the Ancient Assyrians. Sixth Edition. Plates and Woodcuts. 2 Vols 8vo. 36s. *** A Popular Edition. With Illustrations. Post 8vo. ;
7s 6J.
Nineveh and Babylon Second Expedition
to Assyria.
being
;
Plates.
Svo.
the
Narrative of a
21s.
A Pupular Edition. With Illustrations. Post Svo. 7s. 6 i. (Stanley) Short Practical Hebrew Grammar. With an Appendix, containin;; the Hebrew Text cf treuesis i.— vi., and Psalms *^*
LEATHES'
i.— vi.
LENNEP'S With
LESLIE'S
Grammatical Analysis and Vocabulary.
Post Svo.
7s. 6
I.
(Rev. H. J. Van) Missionary Travels in Asia Minor. Illustrations.
2 Vols.
Post Svo.
(C. R.) Handbook for Post Svo. 10s. 6d.
{In preparation.)
Young
Painters.
With
Illustra-
tions.
Autobiographical from his Correspondence. Post Svo. 18s.
Recollection?, with Selections Edited by Ton Taylor. Portrait. 2 Vols
Life and Works of Sir Joshua Reynolds. and Illustrations. 2 Vols. Svo. 42s.
traits
Por-
LETTERS FROM THE BALTIC. By
a Lady. Post Svo. 2s. Madras. By a Lady. Post Svo. 25. SiKRRA Leone. By a Lady. Post Svo. 3^. 6d. LEVI'S (Leone) Wages and Earnings of the Woiking Classes.
With some Facts
LEWIS
Glossary of 12mo. -
Illustrative of their
On
(Sir G. C.)
Economic Condition.
6s.
4s. 6d.
(M. G.) Journal of a Residence
West
Svo.
Government of Dependencies. Svo. j[2.s. Provincial Words used in Herefordshire, &c. the
Indies.
Post Svo.
among
the Negroes in the
2s.
LIDDELL'S (Dean)
History of Rome. From ihe Earliest Time to the Establishment of the Empire. With the History of Literature and Art. 2 Vols. Svo. 28s. Student's History of Rome, abridged from the above Work. With Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6./.
LINDSAY'S
i
(Lord) Lives of the Lindsays ; or, a Memoir of the Houses of Crawfurd and Halcarres. With Extracts from O.licial Papers and I ersonal Narratives. Second Edition. 3 Vols. Svo. 24s.
LISPINGS
LOW LATITUDES;
from or, the Journal of the Hon. ImpulsiaGiLshington. Edited by LoRuDuKKERi.v. With21 Platcs.Uo.21s.
LIST OF
22
WORKS
LITTLE ARTHUR'S HISTORY OP ENGLAND. Callcott.
New
Fcap. 8vo.
2s. Qd.
LIVINGSTONE'S
Edition, continued
Account
Popular
(Dr.)
Travels in Soutb Africa.
1862.
to
With of
5iis
Post 8vo.
Illustrations.
By Lady 20 'Woodcuts.
Missionary
Qs.
Narrative of an Expedition to the Zambezi and Tributaries; and of the Discovery of Lakes Shirwa and Nyassa. 1858-64. Map and Illustrations. 8vo. 21s. its
LIYONIAN TALES. By Post 8vo.
Baltic."
LOCKH ART'S
G.) Ancient Spanish Ballads. Translated, with Notes. New Edition.
—-
LONDON
Life of
Theodore Hook.
A
(OLD).
the
Historical
(J.
Romantic. ^
Author of « Letters from
the
2s.
and
Post 8vo. Is.Qd.
Fcap. 8vo.
Is.
Essays on its Archaeology and Antiquities, by Deax Stanley; A. J. Bebesford Hope, M.P. G. G. Scott, E.A.; R. Westmacott. R.A.; E. Foss, F.S.A.; G. T. Clark; Joseph Bcrtt; Rev. J. R Green; and G. Schaef, F.S.A. Svo. 12s. series of
;
LONDON'S
and Safeguards of Modern
Dangers
(Bishop of)
Theology. Containinj? Suggestions to the Theological Student under present difficulties. Second Edition. Svo. 9s.
LONSDALE'S By
(Bishop) Life. With Selections from his Writings. E. B. Denison, Q.C. With Portrait. Crown Svo. 10s. 6d.
LOUDON'S
(Mrs.) Instructions in Gardening. With Directions and Calendar of Operations for Every Month. EiglUh Edition. Wood-
cuts.
LUCAS'
Fcap. Svo.
5s.
(Samuel) Secularia;
History.
LUCKNOW
Svo.
or,
Surveys on the Main Stream of
12s.
a Lady's Diary of the Siege.
:
Fcap. Svo.
is. Qd.'
LYELL'S
(Sir Charles) Elements of Geology; or, the Ancient Changes of the Earth and its Inhabitants as illustrated by Geological Monuments. Sixth Edition. Woodcuts. Svo. 18s.
Principles of Geology;
or,
the
Modern Changes
of the Earth and its Inhabitants considered as illustrative of Geology. Tenth Edition. With Illustrations. 2 Vols. Svo. 32s.
Geological
Evidences
Third Edition. Illustrations.
of
Svo.
the
Antiquity
of
Man.
14s.
LYTTELTON'S (Lord) Ephemera. Post Svo. 10s. Qcl LYTTON'S (Lord) Poems. Neiv Edition, Post Svo. 10s.
Qd.'
Lost Tales of Miletus. Second Edition. Post Svo. Is.Qd,
'
MACPHERSON'S
(]\Iajor S. C.) Memorials of Service in India, while Political Agent at Gwalior duiiug the Mutiny. With Portrait
and
Illustrations.
M AEON'S
Svo.
12s.
(Lord) Works.
See Stanhope (Earl
of).
McCLINTOCK'S (Sir
L.) Narrative of the Discovery of the Fate of Sir John Franklin and his Companions in the Arctic Seas. Twelfth Thousand. Illustrations. Svo. 16 J.
M'-CULLOCH'S Works.
(J.
R.)
Collected
With Notes and Memoir.
Edition of Ricardo's Political Svo.
16s.
MaoDOUGALL'S Artillery.
MAINE
(Col.) Modern Warfare as Influenced Witb Plans. Post Svo. 12s.
(H.Sumner) On Ancient Law:
Early History of Society, and
its
Relation
to
by
Modem
Connection with the Modern Ideas. Svo. 12s. its
—
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
23
MALCOLM'S
Zs. 6d. (Sir John) Sketches of Persia. Post 8vo. (Canon) Limits of Religious Thought Examined. Being the Bampton Lectures for 1S5S. Post 8vo. 8s. 6d. MANSFIELD (Sir William) On a Gold Currency for India.
MANSEL
8vo.
6d.
3y.
MANTELL'S
(Gideon
Thoughts on Animalcules;
A.)
Invisible World, as revealed by the Microscope.
MANUAL OF
Plates.
SCIENTIFIC ENQUIRY.
the
or,
16mo.
6s.
For the Use of
Travellers. Edited by Sir J. F. IIeusciiei. and Rev. R. Main. Maps. Post 8vo. 9s. (Published by order of the Lords of the Admiralty.)
MARKHAM'S
(Mrs.) History of England. From the First InvaRomans, down to Recent Times. New Edition, continued to 1863. Woodcuts. 12mo. 4s. From the Conquest by History of France. the Gauls, to Recent Times. Xew Edition, cordinued to 1Sj6. Woodsion bv the
12mo.
cuts.
4.V.
History of Germany.
From
the Invasion by Marius,
Recent Time?. New Edition. Woodcuts. 12mo. 4s. (Clements R.) Travels in Peru and India. and Illustrations. 8vo. 16s.
to
Maps
MAERYAT'S
(Joseph) History of Modern and Mediaeval Pottery TJurd and and Porcelain. AVith a Description of the Manufacture. rcvistd and enlarged Edition. Plates and Woodcuts. 8vo. {Nearly Ready.)
(Horace) Jutland, the Danish hagen.
Illustrations.
Sweden and Post 8vo.
Vols.
MARSH'S
(G. P.)
Post Svo.
MAUREL'S of the
MAYNE'S
Post Svo.
2 Vols.
Isle
Isles,
and
Copen-
24s.
of Gothland.
Illustrations.
2
2Ss.
Student's Manual of the English Language.
7s. Gd.
(Jules) Essay on the Character, Actions,
Duke
of Wellington.
Fcap. Svo.
Second Edition.
and "Writings Is. 6^.
Four Years in British Columbia and Van-
(Capt.)
couver Island. Its Forests, Rivers, Coasts, and Gold Fields, and Resources for Colonisation. Illustrations. Svo. 16s.
MELVILLE'S (Hermann) Typee and Omoo;
or.
Adventures
amongst the Marquesas and South Sea Islands. 2 Vols. Post Svo.
7«.
MILLS'
(Rev. John) Three Months' Residence at Nablus, with an Account of the Modern Samaritans. Illustrations. Post Svo. 10s. 6d. MILMAN'S (Dean) Historical Works. Containing: 1. History of
——
the Jews, 3 Vols. 2. History of Early Christianity, 3 Vols. tory of Latin Christiauity, 9 Vols. Post Svo. 6s. each.
Annals of trations.
Svo.
(//(
St. Paul's preparation.)
3.
His-
Portrait and Illus-
Cathedral.
Character and Conduct of the Apostles considered as an Evidence of Christianity.
Svo. 10s. 6d.
Translations from the and Bacchanals of Euripiiies. With
Agamemnon
of iEschylus Crown Svo. 12«. AVorks of Horace. With 100 woodcuts. Small Svo. 7cf.6(Z. Life of Horace. Woodcuts. Svo. ^s. Poetical
Works.
Fall of Jerusalem.
War.
(Capt. E. A.) PoatSvo. 2«.
Plates.
Illustrations.
3 Vols.
Fcap. Svo.
Wayside Cross.
Fcap. Svo.
18».
Is.
A
Talo of the Carlist
WORKS
LIST OF
2i
MEllEDITH'S Wales.
(Mrs. Charles) Notes and Sketches of Post 8vo.
New
South
25.
A
^lESSIAH (THE):
Narrative of the Life, Travels, Death, and Ascension of our Blessed Lord. By the Author of " Life of Bihhop Ken." Map. 8vo. 18s,
Eesiirrccticin,
MICHIE'S (Alexander)
Overland Route from Peking
Siberian
through the Deserts and Steppes of Mongolia, Tartary, Maps and IHustrations. Svo. 16^.
to Petersburg,
&c.
MODERN DOMESTIC COOKERY. Economy and
New
Edition.
MOORE'S
(Thomas)
and Letters of Lord Byron.
Life
Fcap. Svo.
6 Vols.
Founded on Principles
of
Practical Knowledt^e and adapted for Private Families. "Woodcuts. Fcap. 8vo. 5s.
IBs.
or 1 Vol.
;
Portraits.
Plates.
Eoyal Svo.
MOTLEY'S
9s.
(J. L.) History of the United Netherlands from the ef "William the Silent to the Twelve Years' Truce, 16( 9, EmbracEnglish-Dutch the struggle ing against Spain; and a detailed Account of the Sjiaiiisli Armada. Portraits. 4 Vols. Svo. 60s. Or Fopulur Edit on. 4 Vols. Post Svo. Gs. each. :
Death
MOUHOT'S
(Henri) Siam, Cambojia, and Lao; a Narrative of
Travels and Discoveries.
MOZLEY'S
2 vols.
Svo.
32s.
Svo.
14^.
Primitive Doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. Svo.
*Js.Qd.
MUNDY'S
Pen
(General)
Third Edition.
MUNRO'S
Illustrations.
(Rev. J. B.) Treatise on Predestination.
and
Pencil
Post Svo.
Plates.
Sketches
(General Sir Thomas) Life and Letters.
G. K. Gleig.
MURCHISON'S Mountains.
Eoyal
4to.
Post Svo.
in
India.
7s. 6d.
By
the Rev.
2,s.M.
(Sir Roderick) Russia in Europe and the Urai With Coloured Maps, Plates, Sections, «S:c. 2 Vols. 5?. 5s.
Siluria
;
or,
taining Organic Remains.
a History of the Oldest Rocks conFourth Edition. Map and Plates. Svo, 30a.
MURRAY'S RAILWAY READING. WKLLiMeroN. Bv Lord Ellebmebb. NiMROD on the Chase, Is. Essays from "Tub Times." 2 Vols.
Containing:—
Rai.i.am's Litebary Essats. Mahon's Joan of Abc. la. Heah's Kmigra.nt. is. 6(i. NiMKOD ON THE Road. Is. Croker on tuk Guili.otinb. Hollway's Aorway. -2s. Maurkl's Wellington. la.Gd.
6d. 8».
2».
Music and Dbbss. Is. Layaru's Account OP iS'ineveh. hi. Milman's Kall of Jerusalem. 1«. Mahon's " I'oBTY-FiVB." 3s. Lifk of Theodore Hook. Is. Deeds of Naval Daring, 'ii.Gd.
The Flower Garden.
The Honey Bee. Is. James' .Ksop's Fables. NiMBOD ON THE TuRP. Abt of Dining. is.6d.
Lockhart's Spanish IJallads. 24.6(1. Taylor's Aotks from Lifk. 2«. Rejected Addresses. Is, Pknn's IIints on Angliwg. 1«.
it.
6d.
MUSIC AND DRESS. By Picview."
Campbell's Likr of Bacoji.
2s. 6(2.
Fcap. Svo.
la.
2i.6d.
Is.
a Lady. Reprinted from the
Quarterly
Is.
NAPIER'S
(Sir Chas.) Life; chiefly derived from his Journals and Letters. P.y Siu "W. Nai'ter. Second Edition. Portraits. 4 Vols.
Post Svo.
48s.
(Sir AVm.) Life and Letters.
M.P.
Portraits.
War.
Fourth Edition.
2 Vols.
Crown
Svo.
Edited by H. A. Bruce, 28,s.
English Battles and Sieges of the Peninsular Portrait.
Post Svo.
9s.
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
NAUTICAL
ALMANACK.
(The)
25
Royal 8vo.
{By
2s. Qd.
Authority.)
NAY Y LIST (The). {Published Quarterly, hy Authority.) GJ. NEW TESTAMENT (Illustrated). With Explanatory
16mo.
2s.
Com-
Edited by AKcnDKACox Chuetox, M.A., and Basil Jones, 110 authentic Views of Places, from Sketches and Photographs taken on the spot. 2 Vols. Crown 8vo. 30<. cloth 523. 6c?. calf; 6.3s. morocco.
mentary.
M.A. With
;
NICHOLLS'
George) History of the English,
(Sir
Scotch Poor Laws.
Account of the Forest
Historical
G.)
"VVoodcnts, &c.
and
8vo.
4 Vuls.
H.
(Eev. Dean.
Irish
Post 8vo.
lO.s.
of
GJ.
NICOLAS'
(Sir Harris) Historic Peerage of England. Exhibiting the Origin, Descent, and Present iitate of eveiy Title of Peerage which has existed in this Country since the Conquest. By
William Courthope.
NIMEOD On
the
Fcap.Svo.
Svo.
30s.
Chace— The Turf— and The
Woodcuts.
Eoad.
3s. 6d.
OLD LONDON
;
Papers read at the London Ci ngress of the
ArchiPolo-ical Institute, July, ISCG. By A. J. B. Bkrvsfi rd IIopk, M.P.; Dean Staxi^y, D.D.; G. T. Clark, Esq G. Gilisert Scutt. HA. Professor Westmacutt, R.A.; Edward Foss, F.S.A.; Joseph BuRTT, Esq.; Rev. J. K. Green; George Scuarf, F.S.A. NVith Illustrations. Svo. 125. ;
;
OXENHAM'S (Kev. W.) English Notes for Latin Elegiacs
;
designed
for early Proiicients in the Art of Latin Versitication, with Prefatory Rules of Comnosition in Elegiac Metre. Fourth Edition. l2mo. 35. bd.
OXFOPtD'S
(Bisfiop of) Popular Life of William Wilberforce. Post Svo. 10s. 6(/. Philosophy in Sport made Science in Earnest; or, the First Principles of Natural Philosophy inculcated by aid of the Toys and Sports of Youth. Ninth Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6J. Portrait.
PARIS'
(Dr.)
PARKYNS'
(.MAysKiELD) Life in Abyssinia
Residence and Travels in 30 Illu.strations. Post Svo.
PEEL'S
(Sir Robert) and Mr. Cardwell.
PENN'S
tliat
Country.
:
During a Three Year-i' Edition, with Map and
New
7s. 6d.
Memoirs.
Edited
Post Svo.
2 Vols.
by Earl Stanhope
7a. 6i. each.
Maxims and Hints
(Richard)
for an Angler and ChessNi'w Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. Is. (F. C.) Principles of Athenian Arcliitecture, and the Optical Refinements exhibited in the Construction of the Ancient Buildings at Athens, from a Survey. With 40 Plates. Folio. 5/. 6s.
player.
PENROSE'S PERCY'S
(John,
M.D.)
Metallurgy of Fuel, Coal, Fire-Clay?,
Coppfr, Zinc, Brass, &c.
Illustrations.
Svo.
21s.
Metallurgy of Iron and Steel. Illustrations. Svo. 425. Metallurgy of Lead,Silver,Gol(l,Platiuum, Nivkul, Cobalt, Antimony,
PIIILLIPP PHILLIPS' logj').
niMuiitli, Arsenic, .Vc.
(C. S. M.)
On
Illustrations.
Jurisprudence.
Svo.
Svo.
[In the I'ress.)
12.s'.
(John) Memoirs of William Smith, (the Father of GecPortrait.
Svo.
Geology of District.
Plates.
4to.
7s. 6d.
Yorkshire, Part
I.,
The
2(15.— Part
Coast,
and
Limestone
II., 305.
Rivers, Mountains, and Sea Coast of Yorkshire. With Essays on the Climate, Scenery, and Ancient Inhabitants. Second Edition, Plates. Svo.
15«.
LIST OF
26
PHILPOTTS' "
WORKS
(Bishop) Letters to the late Charles Butler, on his
Roman
Catholic Church." New Edition. Tost Svo. 6s. Life and Works. Edition. Connearly 500 unpublished Letters. Edited, with a New Life,
Book
of the
A New
POPE'S (Alexander) taininf^
Introductions and Notes, 8vo. [In the Press.)
by Rev. Whitwell Elwin.
Portraits
PORTER'S
(Rev. J. L.) Five Years in Damascus. With Travels to Palmyra, Lebanon and other Scripture Sites. Map and Woodcuts. Post Svo.
2 Vols.
21s.
Handbook for Syria and Palestine including an Account :
Geography, History, Antiquities, and Inhabitants ot these Countries, the Peninsula of Sinai, Edom, and the Syrian Desert. Maps. 2 Vols, Post Svo. 24s. of the
PRAYER-BOOK Svo. 18s. cloth Is. 6d.
Vig-
Medium
With 12
Illustrations.
By Otto
Speckter.
or Coloured, 2s. Qd.
Post Svo.
Deserts.
Initials,
Thos. James.
;
;
QUARTERLY REVIEW (The). RAMBLES among the Turkomans RANKE'S
Borders,
Edited, with Notes, by Rev. 36s. morocco. 31s. Qd. calf
PUSS IN BOOTS. 16mo.
with
(Illustrated),
&c.
nettes,
8vo.
Qs.
and Bedaweens of the Syrian
10s. Gd.
Rome
History of the Popes of
(Leopold)
Translated from the 16th and 17th Centuries. Austin. 3 Vols. Svo. 30s.
RAWLINSON'S
(Rev. George)
during the German by Sarah
A New
Herodotus.
English
Assisted by Sir IIenrv Edited with Notes and Essays. Maps and J. G. Wilkinson. Second Edition. Woodcut. 4 Vols. Svo. 4Ss.
Version.
Rawlinson and Sir
Great Monarchies of the Ancient World, With Maps and 650
Five
Chaldsea, Assyria, Media, Babylonia, and Persia. 4 Vols. Svo. i6s. each.
Illustrations.
Historical Evidences of the truth of the Scripture Records stated anew. Second Edition. Svo. 14s. REED'S (E. J.) Practical Treatise on Shipbuilding in Iron and steel.
With
250 Illustrations.
REJECTED ADDRESSES Fcap. Svo.
RENNIE'S 1862.
{In the Press.)
Svo.
(The).
By James and Horace Smith.
Is.
Arms
British
(D. P.) Post Svo.
in Peking, 1860
;
Kagosima,
l'2s.
Peking and the Pekingese: Being a Narrative of the First Post Svo.
Year
of the British
Embassy
in China.
Illustrations.
2 Vols.
24s.
Story of Bhotan and the Dooar War including Sketches of a Residence in tlie Himalayas and Visit to Bhotan in Post Svo. 12s. Woodcut. 1865. and Map ;
REYNOLDS'
(Sir Joshua)
Life
and
Commenced by
Times.
C. R. Leslie, R.A., continued and concluded 2 Vols. Svo. 42s.
by Tom Taylor. Portraits
and Illustrations.
Descriptive Catalogue of his Works.
With Notices
of their present owners and localities. By Tom Taylor and W. Franks. With Illustrations. Fcap. 4to. {In the Press.)
RICARDO'S
(David)
Life and Writings.
Political Works. By J. R. M'Culloch.
RIPA'S (Father) Memoirs during Thirteen Court of Peking.
From
the Italian.
With a Notice New
Edition.
Svo.
Charles of his 16s.
Years' Residence at the
Post Svo.
2s.
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. ROBERTSON'S
27
(Canon) History of the Christian Church, from Age to the Death of Bouiface VIII., a.d. 1122—1304.
the Apostolic 3 Vols. 8vo,
(Rev. Dr.) Biblical Researches in Palestine and the Third Edia Journal of Travels in 1S3S and 1852.
ROBINSON'S
Adjacent Kegions
—
425.
Physical Geography of the Holy Land. lOs.
ROME
;
Maps. 3 Vols. Svo.
tion.
Post Svo.
M.
(Student's History of). From the Earliest Times to THE Establishment of the Empibe. By I^Deak Liddell. WoodPost Svo. 7s. M. (Smaller History
cuts.
cuts.
16mo.
ROWLAND'S Its Kise,
Manual
(David)
Growth, and Present
Laws 8vo.
By
of).
AYm. Smith, LL.D.
Wood-
35. Qd.
of
of the Engli.?h Post Svo. 105.
State.
Constitution; Qd.
Post
Nature the Foundation of Morals.
6s.
RUNDELL'S
Domestic Cookery, adapted for Private Ntw Edition. Woodcuts. Fcap. Svo. 05. RUSSELL'S (Rutherfurd) History of the Heroes of Medicine. (Mrs.)
Families.
Portraits.
Svo.
RUXTON'S
(George among the Wild tains.
Post Svo.
145.
F.) Travels in Mexico ; with Adventures Tribes and Animals of the Prairies and Rocky Moun35. <6d.
(Sir Robert) Brigade in Affghanistan. With an Account of the Defence of Jellalabad. By Rev. G. R. Gleig. Post Svo. 2s.
SALE'S
SALLESBURY'S Fcap. Svo.
(Edward) "Children of the Lake."
A
Poem.
45. Gd.
SANDWITH'S (Humphry)
Siege of Kars.
Post Svo.
35. Qd.
SCOTT'S
(G. Gilbert) Secular and Domestic Architecture, Present and Future. Svo. 95. (Master of Baliol) University Sermons. Post Svo. S5. GcZ.
SCROPE'S
(G. P.) Geology and Extinct France. Illustrations. Medium Svo. 305.
Yolcanoes of Central
SHAW'S
Edited, with (T. B.) Manual of English Literature. 7s. Gd. ^'otes and Illustrations, by Dr. Wm. Smith. P<jst Svo.
Selected from the Specimens of English Literature. Post Svo. 7s. 6d. Edited hy Wm. Smith, LL.D. SHIRLEY (Evelyn P.) on Deer and Deer Parks, or some Account Illusof English Parks, with Notes on the Management of Deer. Chiet Writers.
trations.
A
Lady.
21s.
4to.
SIERRA LEONE
;
Described in Letters to Friends at Home.
Post Svo.
SIMMONS
(Capt. T. F.) Courts-Martial; with a
litvised Edition.
Svo.
By
35. (kl.
on the Constitution and Practice of Summary of the Law of Evidence. Sixth and
(//* the JYess.)
A
SMITH'S
(Rev. A. C.) Attractions of the Nile and its Banks. Journal of Tiavtls iu Egypt and Nubia. Woodcut.s. 2 Vols. Pout Svo.
SOUTH'S cies.
(JouN F.) Household Surgery Scvcuteenlh Thotuui,d.
Woodcuts.
;
or,
Hints on Emergen-
Fcp. Svo.
4s.
W.
WORKS
LIST OF
28
SMILES' (Samuel)
Lives of British Engineers
from the Earliest
;
Period to the Present Time, with an account of their Pi incipal Works; inchiding a History of the Invention and Iiitroihiction of ttie Steam Engine. Witli 9 Portraits and 400 Ilhistrations. 4 Vols. 8vo. 'ils. each.
Lives of George and Robert Stephenson. 2Is. Or Popular
With
Illustrations. Medium 8vo. cuts. Post Svo. 6s.
and
With
Lives of Boulton and "Watt.
Medium
trations.
Svo.
and
Portraits
WoodIllus-
21s.
With Portrait
Lives of Brindley and the Early Engineers. and 50 Woodcuts. Po.st Svo. Qs.
—
Portraits
Edition, with
Life of Telford. With a History of Woodcuts. Post Svo. Gs.
Eoads and Travelling
in England.
— Self-Help. With Illustrations of Character and Conduct. French. Post Or — Industrial Biography Iron-Workers and Tool Makers. in
Svo. 6s.
5s.
:
—A
sequel to " Self- Help."
Post Svo.
6s.
Huguenots in England and Ireland
:
Churches and Industries. Third Thousand. Svo.
Workmen's Earnings
their Settlements, 16s.
— Savings— and Strikes.
Fcap. Svo.
Is. 6c?.
SOMERVILLE'S (Mart) Post Svo.
Portrait.
Woodcuts.
Edition.
(Robert)
Post Svo.
7s.
12mo.
Fifth
Edition.
Physical
the
Book
Ninth
Sciences.
9s.
and Microscopic of the
Science.
Church.
Illustra-
Seventh Edition.
Bunyan and Cromwell. Post Svo. With 12 Woodcuts.
2s.
Square
(Otto) Puss in Boots.
Is. 6d. plain,
STANLEY'S
Geography.
M.
Lives of
SPECKTER'S
of
Post Svo.
Molecular
SOUTHEY'S
Physical
9s.
— Connexion
or 2s. Qd. coloured.
(Dean) Sinai and Palestine.
Map.
Svo.
145.
Bible in the Holy Land being Extracts from the above Work. Weodcuts, Fcap. Svo, 2s. Qd. ;
St. Paul's Epistles to tations and Notes. Svo. IBs.
the Corinthians.
History of the Eastern Church.
Plans.
With Svo.
Disser12s.
Jewish Church. 2 Yols. Svo. 16s. each. Historical Post 8vo.
Memorials
of
Canterbury.
Woodcuts.
7s. 6d.
Memorials of Westminster Abbey. trations.
Svo.
Illus-
ISs.
Sermons in the East,
Svo.
9s.
on Evangelical and Apostolical Teaching. Post 8vo.
7s. 6d.
Addresses akd Charges of Bishop Stanley. Memoir.
Svo.
10s. Qd.
With
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. SMITH'S
(Dr. Wm.)
Dictionary of the
Bible;
Biography, Geography, and Natural History. 8vo.
29
its
Antiquities
Illustrations
1055.
3 Vols'
Concise Bible Dictionary, for Families and Students Illustrations. Medium 8vo. 21a-. Smaller Bible Dictionary, for Schools and Young Person^! Illustrations.
Post 8vo.
7:*.
6/.
Dictionary of Christian Antiquities:
Age
ot the Apo.tles to the bvo. [In pi-'-paration.)
Biblical Atlas,
of
Charlemagne.
from the Times Medium
Illustrations.
{In preparation.)
Folio.
Greek and Roman Antiquities. Woodcuts. Svo. i2s. Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. Woodcuts.
3 Vols.
Svo.
bl. 15s.
Qd.
Greek and Roman Svo.
Geography.
Woodcuts.
2 Vols
80s.
Classical Atlas.
Folio.
{In j^rejmrafion.) Classical Dictionary, for the Higher Forms. Woodcuts. Svo. IS.-s.
Smaller Classical Cro^\-n Svo.
With 750
With 200 Woodcuts.
Dictionary.
7s. 6d.
Smaller Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. "With 200 Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. Copious and Critical English-Latin Dictionary. Svo and 12nio.
(Xcarly Pi-ady.)
Complete Latin English Dictionary. the
K
With Tables
)man Calendar, Measures, Weights, and Money.
8vo.
Smaller Latin-English Dictionary. 12aio. Latin-English Vocabulary; for Phiedrus, Nepos, and Caisar.
Principia
12mo.
A
Exercise BmoIc, with Vocabularies.
A
Roman
Cornelius
12ino.
3s. ed.
Reading-book of MythoWith Notes and
Antiquities, and History. Third Edition. l2iuo. 3s. Qd.
HL
Part Hexameters and Pentameters; k,':.
6d.
Grammar, Delectus, and
Sixth Edition.
Part n. Dictionary.
of
21s.
3s. Qd.
Latina— Part L
logy. Geography,
7^.
Second Edition.
12uio.
Eclog.
A
Latin Poetry Book.
Ovidiana:;
Latin
Prosody
3s. Ql.
Part IV.
Latin Prose Composition.
Rules of Syntax, with Examples, Explanations of Svuunyms, and Exercises on the Syntax. Second Edition. 12mo. 3s. 6d.
Part V. for Translation into Latin.
Student's Post Svo.
Latin
l2nio.
Short Tales and Anecdotes
3s.
Grammar
for
the
Higher
Forms
6i'.
Smaller
Latin
Grammar,
for the Middle and Louver 12mo. Ss. 6d. Initia Graci, Part L Introduction to Greek; comprehending Grammar, Delectus, and Exercist-h 'Ok. With Vocabuliries. 12mo. 3s. 6 i. Initia Groeca, Part IL Reading Book. Containing Short Tales, Anecloles, Fables, Myth)l-gy, and Grecian IJi.story. Arranged in a Hystematic Prot^ression, with a Lexicon. iJmo. 3s. 6d. Initia Gra-L-a, Part III. Greek Prose Composition. Con-
Forms.
An
'
A
-
taining 12uiO.
ilie lliiK's of Syntax, with copious {In prepirutiun.)
Examples and Exercises.
j '
WORKS
LIST OF
30
Grammar
(Dr. Wm.) Student's Greek
SMITH'S
By
Forms,
Smaller Greek 12mo.
Fonns.
_.
Post 8vo. 6s. Grammar for the
Higher
Middle and Lower
3s. 6d.
Smaller History
16mo.
for the
Professor Curtius.
With
England.
of
Illustrations.
3s. 6J.
With
Illustrations.
l6mo.
With
Illustrations.
16mo.
History of Greece. 35. Cd.
- History of Rome. 5.
6d.
With
Classical Mythology. the Ancient Poets. Illustrations. 12nio.
Translations from
3s. 6d.
With Woodcuts.
Scripture History.
16mo.
(In preparation.)
STUDENT'S HUME.
A
History of England from the Invasion
of Julius Cfesar totlieEevolutionof 1688. 13y David Hume. Post Svo. 7s. Qd, to 185S. Woodcuts. *** Questions on the ahove "Woik, 12mo. 2s.
Corrected
and continued
HISTORY OF FRANCE to the
M.A.
OF GREECE
HISTORY Times
from the Earliest Times By "W. H. Peakson,
;
Establishment of the Second Empire, 1852. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6d.
from
;
the
Earliest
Roman Conquest. "With the History of Literature and Art. Smitu, LL.D. Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. Questions on the above Work, 12mo. 2s. to the
By Wm. *¥:*
HISTORY OF ROME;
from the Earliest Times Establishment of the Empire. With the History of Literature Crown Svo. 7s. Qd. Woodcuts. Liddell. Dean and Art. Bv Decline and Fall of the ; an Epitome of the Roman Empire. Incorporating the Researches of Recent Commentators. Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. 6rf. to the
GIBBON
OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY to the Return of the Jews from Captivity. Svo. 7s. Qd.
NEW TESTAMENT
from the Creation ; Waps and Woodcuts. Post
HISTORY.
duction connecting the History of the Old and and Woodcuts. Post Svo. 7s. &d.
BLACKSTONE
:
With an
New
MANUAL OF ANCIENT GEOGRAPHY. W. L. Bevax, M.A. Woodcuts. Post Svo. Is.M. MODERN GEOGRAPHY. L. Bevan.
Post Svo.
Woodcuts.
—
Maps
a Systematic Abridgment of the
By R. Malcolm Keek, LL.D. Post Svo.
Entire Commentaries.
W.
Intro-
Testaments.
7*. 6d.
By Rev. By Rev.
{In the Press.)
HISTORY.
ECCLESIASTICAL
Containing the History of the Christian Clnnch from the Close of the "New Testament Canon to the Reformation. Post Svo. {In 'preparation.)
MORAL PHILOSOPHY. Quotations and References.
By William Fleming, D.D.
Post Svo.
With 7s.6cZ.
ENGLISH LANGUAGE. By Geo. P. Maesh.
Post Svo.
7s. &d.
ENGLISH LITERATURE. By Shaw, M.A.
Post Svo.
SPECIMENS
T. B.
Is.Qd.
OF
Selected from the Chief Writers. Svo. 7s, 6d.
ENGLISH LITERATURE. By Thomas
B.
Shaw, M.A.
Post
PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
31
STANHOPE'S
(Earl) History of England, from the Peace of Utrecht to the Peace of Versailles, 1713-83. Librar;/ Edition. 7 vols. 93s. Or Popular Edition. 7 Vols. Post Svo. 5s. each.
8vo.
from
British India, PostSvo. 3s. 6c/.
1783.
Forty-Five Post Svo.
Scotland.
;
Origin
its
till
a Narrative of
"
the Peace of
the Eebellion in
3s.
Spain under Charles the Second. Historical and Critical Essays.
Post Svo. Post Svo.
6s. 6d. 35.
Post Svo.' 10s. 6d. Conde. Post Svo. 3s. 6d. William Pitt. With Extracts from his
6d.
Life of Belisarius.
Papers.
ST.
Post Svo.
4 Vols,
Portraits.
MS.
2is.
Post Svo. 5s. 6d. Story of Joan of Arc. Fcap. Svo. Is. (Charles) Wild Sports and Natural History of the Miscellanies.
^
JOHN'S
Uighlands.
Post Svo.
3s. 6d.
(Batle) Adventures in the Libyan Desert and the
^
Oasis of Jupiter
STEPHENSONS'
Ammon. (George
'Woodcuts.
and
PostSvo. 2s. Lives.
Egbert)
Smilks. With Portraits and 70 Illustrations. Or Popular Edition with Woodcuts. Post Svo. 6s.
STOTHARD'S By
(Thos.)
With
Mrs. Brat.
By Samuel
Medium
Svo.
21s.
Life. With Personal Eeminiscences. Portrait and 60 Woodcuts. 4to. 21s.
STREET'S
From Personal (G. E.) Gothic Architecture in Spain. Observations during several journeys through that country. IllusMedium
trations.
Svo.
50s.
SULLIYAJs'S
(Sir Edward) Princes, Warriors, and Statesmen of India an Historical Narrative of the most Important Events, from the Invasion of Mahmoud of Ghizni to that of Nadir Shah. Svo. 12*. (George Henri), M.A. Principles a^. Stake, being Essays on the Church Questions of the day. By various AVriters. Svo. ;
SUMNER
(In the Press.)
SWIFT'S (Jonathan) John- Forsteb.
Life, Letters, Journals, (In Preparation.)
and Works.
By
Svo.
SYBEL'S
(Yon) History of Europe during the French Revolution, 17S0— 179.5. Tran.slated from the German. By Walter C. Pebrt.
& 2.
Vol!<. I
SYME'S TAIT'S
Svo.
24s.
(Professor) Principles of Surgery. (Bishop) Dangers and Safeguards
Wh
Edition.
of
Modern Theology,
Svo. 12s.
containing Suggestions to the Theological Student under Present DilHcultics.
TAYLOR'S
Svo.
9s.
(Henry) Notes from Life
—on
Money, Humility and
Independence, Wisdom, Choice in Marriage, Children, and Life Fcap. yvo. 2».
THOMSON'S Svo. .
l^oetic.
(Archbishop) Sermons, Preached at Lincoln's Inn.
\Os.U. Life in the Light of God's
Word.
Post Svo. (Js. arranged
THREE-LEAVED MANUAL OP FAMILY PRAYER; 80 as to save the trouble of turning the Roval 8vo. 2s.
TREMENIIEERE (H. proved by
tlie
TRISTRAil'S (H.
S.)
Political
;
Pages backwards and forwards.
The Franchise a Privilege and not a Right, Experience of the Ancients. Fcap. Svo. 'i$. (ki.
B.) Great Sahara, or Wanderings South of the Atlas Mountains. Map and Illustrations. Post Svo. 15s.
WORKS PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY.
LIST OF
32
TWISS' (Horace)
Life of Lord Chancellor Eldon, with Selections from his Correspondence. Portrait. Third Edition. 2 Vols. Post Svo.
21s.
TYTLER'S
By Rev.
(Patrick Fraser) Memoirs.
M.A.
Svo.
J.
W. Burgon,
9s.
YAMBERY'S
(Arminius) Travels in Central Asia, from Teheran the Turkoman Desert on the Eastern Shore of the Caspian to
across
Map and Illustrations.
Khiva, Bokhara, and Samarcand inlS63.
YAN
LEN.NEP (Henry Parts of Asia Minor. (In preparation.)
YAUGHAN'S Svo.
(Rev. Dr.) Sermons
10s.
WAAGEN'S
Svo. 21s,
Missionary Travels in Little Known With Map and^IUustrations. 2 Vols. Post Svo.
J.)
preached in Harrow School.
6(i.
Art in Great Britain.
(Dr.) Treasures of
Being an
Account of the Chief Collections of Paintings, Sculpture, Manuscripts, Miniatures, &c. &c., in this Country. Obtained from Personal Inspection during Visits to England. 4 Vols. Svo.
WELLINGTON'S Campaigns.
(The Duke 8 Vols.
Svo.
of)
Despatches during his various
21s. each.
Supplementary Despatches. Svo.
Civil III.
Svo.
and
Political Correspondence.
I.
to Xll.
Yols.
T.
to
20s. each.
Selections from Despatches Svo.
Yols.
205. each.
and General Orders.
ISs.
Speeches in Parliament.
2 Yols.
Svo.
42*.
WHITE'S
(Henry) Massacre of St. Bartholomew. Preceded by a History of the Religious Wars in the Reign of Charles IX. Based on a Personal Examination of Documents in the Archives of France. With
Illustrations.
Svo.
16s.
WHYMPER'S
(Frederick) Travels and Adventures in Alaska and on tlie Kiver Yukon, the Russian Territory, now ceded to the United States, aud Visits to other pans of the North Pacific. AVith IllustraSvo.
tions.
(Ill
preparation.)
WILKINSON'S
(Sir J. G.) Popular Account of the Private Life, Manners, and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians. With 500 Woodcuts. 2 Vols.
Post Svo.
125.
WILSON'S
(Bishop Daniel) Life, Letters, and Journals. By Rev. JosiAU Bateman. Second Edition. Illustrations. Post Svo. 9s. (Gen^- Sir Robert) Secret History of the French Invasion of Russia, and Retreat of the French Army, 1812. Second
Edition.
Svo.
Private
15s.
Diary of
Travels,
Personal
Services,
and
Puhlic Events, during Missions and Employments in Spain, Sicily, Turkey, Russia, Poland, Germany, &c. 1812.14. 2 Vols. Svo. 26s.
Autobiographical Memoirs. down to the Peace of
his Early Life
Containing an Account of Tilsit.
Portrait.
2 Vols.
Svo.
2Cs.
WOOD
(Sir W. P.) On the Continuity of Scripture, as Declared by the Testimonv of Our Lord and of the Evangelists anl Apostles. Scccnd Edition.
Post Svo.
6s.
WORDSWORTH'S (Archdeacon)
——
—
Attica.
Third Edition.
—
of Greece.
Plates.
Journal of a Tour in Athens and Post Svo.
8s. 6d.
Pictorial, Descriptive, and Ilistorical Account New and Cheaper Edition. With 600 Woodcuts. Royal Svo. .
BBADEUaT,
E'.'AKS,
AND
00.,
PRINTERS, WHITEFRIARS.
BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY
3 9999 04041
390 6
Boston Public Library Central Library, Copley Square
Division of
Reference and Research Services
The Date Due Card
in the
pocket
indi-
cates the date on or before which this
book should be returned
to the Library.
Please do not remove cards from this pocket.
