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
But still naval architecture, considered either as an art or as a
science, was stagnant. As a class the Surveyors were men of very
restricted education--“there is scarcely a name on the list of any
eminence as a designer or a writer.” Those who ordered ships at
the Board were “busy politicians, or amateurs without a knowledge
of science, or sailors too impatient of innovation to regard
improvements.” In no other profession, perhaps, were theory and
practice so out of sympathy with each other. The native art of the
builder was numbed and shackled, by the restrictions imposed upon him
as to tonnage and dimensions; the study of ship form, with a view to
analysing the forces under which sailing ships moved by wind through
water and to discovering the laws which those forces obeyed, was
still mainly an academic pastime of the Society for Improving Naval
Architecture, and outside the province of the naval authorities. Our
ships were still formed on no rational principle. Captured French ships
served as models to be copied. Often our builders would make fanciful
variations from the originals--a little more sheer, a little more
beam, etc. etc.--and as often they spoiled their copies. Whenever they
followed closely the forms and features of the originals they succeeded
in producing vessels which were pronounced to be among the best ships
in the navy.
With this state of affairs, it is no matter for surprise that much of
the new construction of the period was of small value. “Sir Joseph
Yorke produced a set of corvettes, longer and narrower than brigs, none
of which answered; and they were sold out of the service. Then came the
‘Forty Thieves,’ a small class of 74’s; but in justice to the designer,
Sir H. Peake (who copied them from a French ship), it must be added
that his lines were altered by the Navy Board, and the vessels were
contract-built. Lord Melville built half a dozen ‘fir frigates,’ which
neither sailed nor stood under canvas. The 22-gun and 28-gun donkey
frigates ‘could neither fight nor run away’; it was dangerous to be on
board them; and the bad sailing of such vessels was the chief cause of
our ill success in the American War. The old 10-gun brigs, or ‘floating
coffins,’ as they were significantly styled, were equally dangerous and
unsightly. They had no room to fight their guns; no air between decks,
which were only five feet high; extra provisions and stores were piled
above hatches; and the fastest of them sailed no more than eight or
nine knots.”[33]
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