The Evolution of Naval ArmamentRobertson, Frederick Leslie
History
The Evolution of Naval Armament
Robertson, Frederick Leslie
Naval art and science -- History; Ordnance, Naval -- History; Warships -- History
Many other factors contributed to affect, in a manner always subtle
and frequently inexplicable, the sailing qualities of a ship. The form
of the body, the position of masts and the setting up of the rigging,
the disposition of weights, the angle of the yards, the conditions of
stability, all had their effect on the vessel’s motion, and therefore
on her speed through the water. Free water in a ship’s bilge, for
example, had an effect on her degree of stiffness, and from this cause
her speed was not easily predictable. Charnock relates how, in the
colonial wars of the late eighteenth century, an American vessel, the
_Hancock_, was captured after an unprecedented chase, solely because
her commander, injudiciously supposing that by lightening his ship he
would enhance her swiftness, pumped water out of her. It was noticed,
again, that in certain circumstances the speed of a ship increased when
the crew turned into their hammocks.
The lines of the ship were drawn without reference to any science
of naval architecture, and merely by instinct and the accumulated
experience of the builder; the laws of stability and of fluid
resistance were at this time unknown. Experience indicated the
desirability of a short keel, to make the ship turn quickly; of an
ample rake forward from keel to beak-head--“more than a third the
length of the keel, commonly,” says Sir Henry Manwayring, for, “a great
rake forward gives a ship good way and makes her keep a good wind, but
if she have not a full bow it will make her pitch mightily into a head
sea.... The longer a ship’s rake is, the fuller must be the bow”; of
a fine run aft, so as to let the water flow strongly and swiftly to
the rudder and make the ship steer and sail well; of a narrow rudder,
so as not to hold much dead water when the helm was over,--yet, “if a
ship have a fat quarter, she will require a broad rudder.” The correct
formation of the bow was recognised as of the greatest importance,
and the most difficult compromise in the design of a ship. A bow too
bluff offered much resistance to motion through the water; on the other
hand, too sharp a bow lacked buoyancy, and, from the great weight of
mastage, headsails, anchors, etc., which it had to support, caused a
vessel to pitch badly in a head sea. “If the bow be too broad,” wrote
Captain John Smith, in his _Sea Man’s Grammar_, “she will seldom carry
a bone in her mouth, or cut a feather, that is, to make a foam before
her: where a well-bowed ship so swiftly presseth the water as that it
foameth, and in the dark night sparkleth like fire.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account