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
Expert opinion confirmed the wisdom of the government policy.
Experience, in the Franco-Prussian war and elsewhere, confirmed the
views of the experts. “Reviewing the action of the artillerists who
decided to adopt muzzle-loaders, with the greater experience we now
possess it seems that they were right in their decision at the time it
was first made; but there was too much hesitation in coming back to
breech-loaders when new discoveries and great progress in powder quite
altered conditions.”[130] In fact, once having abandoned the disparaged
system, the country was with difficulty persuaded by the professionals
to retrace its steps. In the end, ordnance followed small arms; the
researches of Captain Noble at Elswick proved conclusively to the world
at large the necessity for a reversion to breech-loading; and in 1880
the muzzle-loading gun was finally superseded by a greatly improved
form of breech-loader.
In 1880 the state of knowledge and the conditions under which ordnance
was manufactured were certainly altered from those of ’64. The struggle
between guns and armour begun with the _Gloire_ and _Warrior_ had
continued. In the presence of the new powers of mechanical science,
artillerists and shipbuilders had sought to plumb the possibilities of
offensive and defensive elements in warship design. Guns influenced
armour, armour reacted on guns; both revolutionized contemporary naval
architecture. It was in the effort to aggrandize the power of guns
that Noble discovered that, with the existing powders and with the
short muzzle-loading gun, a natural limit of power was soon reached.
Better results could only be obtained, he showed, by the adoption of
slow-burning powder and a longer gun; by the avoidance of the sudden
high chamber pressure which resulted from the small-grained powder,
and the substitution for it of a chamber pressure which would rise
gradually to a safe maximum and then suffer only a gradual reduction as
the gases expanded behind the moving projectile. The work done by the
gases on the projectile could by this means be enormously increased.
But, for this result, larger powder-charges were required; and these
larger charges of slow-burning powder were found to require much
larger chambers than those embodied in existing guns; in short, the
new conditions called for a new shape of gun. Long guns, having powder
chambers of larger diameter than that of the bore, were necessary, and
these could not conveniently be made muzzle-loading.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account