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
At this point in the evolution of the ironclad it is convenient to
bring our survey to an end. The _Collingwood_ marks the final return
(with one or two notorious exceptions) to the truly broadside ship,
the ship with armament symmetrically disposed fore and aft, intended
to fight with others in the line. From the Admiral class onwards the
modern battleship evolved for years along a continuous and clearly
defined curve of progression. It only remains to close this brief and
necessarily superficial historical sketch with a few remarks upon the
classification of warships.
In tracing the types of ironclads which superseded each other in direct
succession, no mention has been made of other than those which formed
in their time the chief units of naval force. Other war-vessels there
were, of course, subsidiary to the main fighting force, whose value and
functions we now briefly indicate.
So long as sails remained the sole motive power, warships retained the
same classification as they had received in the seventeenth century.
“Up to the time of the Dutch Wars,” says Admiral Colomb, “ships were
both ‘royal’ and of private contribution; of all sorts and sizes
and ‘rates.’ Fighting was therefore promiscuous. Fleets sailed in
the form of half-moons, or all heaped together and, except for the
struggle to get the weather gage, there were no tactics. Actions were
general.” Then, in order to protect their fleets from the fire ship,
the Dutch first introduced the Line of Battle: “in which formation
it was easy for a fleet to leeward to open out so as to let a fire
ship drift harmlessly through.” And so the efficacy of the fire ship
was destroyed. “But now, with a Line, each ship had a definite place
which she could not quit. Hence the diversities in sizes began to be
eliminated. The weakest ships, which might find themselves opposite
the strongest, were dropped for ships ‘fit to lie in the line,’ i.e.
for what were afterwards called ‘line-of-battle ships.’ These ships
would be individually as powerful as possible, only subject to the
objection of putting too many eggs in one basket. Uniformity would thus
be attained. The fleet of line ships, however, required look-outs or
scouts, which could keep the seas and attend, yet out-sail, the fleet.
Hence the heavy frigate. Lastly, there was the much lighter attendant
on commerce (either by way of attack or defence), the light cruiser.”
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