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
In solidity of construction the English ships compared favourably with
those of the Dutch. The thick scantlings introduced by Phineas Pett
now proved of great value; the wood itself, tough English oak, was
unequalled by any other timber. English oak was the best, as Fuller
noted. Even the Dutch had built some of their ships of it; while other
countries frequently built of inferior fir, the splinters of which
killed more than were hit by hostile cannon balls. To what was the
superiority of the English timber due? To the soil and climate of
this favoured country. Under the influence of successions of warmth
and cold, of rain and sunshine, frost and wind, all in a degree most
favourable for alternate growth and consolidation, the English oak
attained an unrivalled strength and durability. Trees planted in
forests, where mutual protection was afforded from wind and cold,
grew rapidly, but were inferior in quality to trees planted in small
parcels or along the hedgerows; these latter, slow-growing and tough,
felled “at the wane of the moon and in the deep of winter,” supplied
the thickstuff, knees, and planking for generations of our royal ships.
Their endurance was frequently remarkable. The bottom timbers would
last for fifty or sixty years, but the upper works, which were subject
to alternations of heat and cold, dryness and moisture, decayed in a
much shorter space of time. The _Royal William_ is quoted by Charnock
as a case in point. This first rate ship was launched in the year
1719, and never received any material repair until 1757. A few years
later she was cut down to a third rate of 80 guns. Participating in
all the sea wars of the time, she was surveyed in 1785 and converted
into a guardship, which post she filled till early in the nineteenth
century.[17]
Much attention, as we have noted, was given in this scientifically
minded Stuart age to the form of body best suited to motion through
water, but the efforts to improve design were largely misdirected.
Many of our ships were unsatisfactory, not only from their slowness
but because they were crank or tender-sided, and unable to bear out
their lower guns or even to carry a stout sail. They were so clogged
with timbers internally that they could not carry the victuals and
stores necessary for long voyages; and vessels built by contract were
often found to be carelessly put together, of green, unseasoned, and
unsuitable timber.
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