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
War came, but even then the full possibilities of shell
fire were not developed. Enough proof was given, however, to show that
in the special circumstances of that war unarmoured ships were of small
value against shell fire. Armour was accordingly requisitioned, and,
some few years after the war, was applied to seagoing warships.
Another development now took place. At this period when disruptive and
incendiary shell was proving itself a more powerful agent than solid
shot of equal size, both shell and shot gained an enhanced value from
the application of rifling to ordnance; moreover, ordnance itself was
developing so quickly that each year saw an appreciable increase in
the unit of artillery force. This variation in the unit profoundly
affected naval architecture. No longer was there a unit of standard
and unchanging value, which, when multiplied by a certain number,
conveyed a measure of a ship’s offensive power. No longer was the size
of a ship a rough measure of its fighting strength; by concentrating
power in a few guns, offensive strength could be correspondingly
concentrated, if desired, in a small vessel. On the other hand, in
view of the sudden accession of offensive strength, the defensive
capacities of a ship remaining as before, it was now true that size had
become an element of danger, diminutiveness of safety. Hence warships,
which had for centuries triumphed in the moral and physical effect of
their height and size, suddenly sought to shrink, to render themselves
inconspicuous, to take the first step towards total invisibility.
An effect of the same development--of the increasing size of the unit
gun, and therefore of the decreasing number of units which a ship could
carry--was the mounting of every big gun so as to command as large an
arc of fire as possible.
As the final development we note that the steam engine, in endowing the
warship with motions far more variable, certain and controlled than
those of the sailing ship, called forth tactical ideas quite different,
in many respects, from those which governed sea actions in the canvas
period. The warship itself is the embodiment of tactical ideas. Hence
the design of the steam-propelled warship evolved along a different
line from that of the sailing ship.
By the effect and interaction of these developments a complete
revolution was compassed in naval architecture; by the progress of
artillery and the steam engine, and by the improvement in mechanical
processes in general, an entirely new unit of naval force was evolved
from the old sailing ship: the mastless, turreted ironclad of the late
’sixties, the precursor of the modern battleship.
§
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