The history of our Navy from its origin to the present day, 1775-1897, vol. 3 (of 4)Spears, John Randolph
History
The history of our Navy from its origin to the present day, 1775-1897, vol. 3 (of 4)
Spears, John Randolph
United States. Navy -- History; United States. Navy -- History -- Spanish-American War, 1898
The fleet which Macdonough now commanded was as follows: the
_Saratoga_, manned by a crew of two hundred and forty and carrying
eight long twenty-fours, six short forty-twos, and twelve short
thirty-twos; the brig _Eagle_, Captain Robert Henly, manned by a crew
of one hundred and fifty, and carrying eight long eighteens and twelve
short thirty-twos; the schooner _Ticonderoga_, Lieutenant Stephen
Cassin, manned by a crew of one hundred and twelve, and carrying
four long eighteens, eight long twelves, and five short thirty-twos;
the sloop _Preble_, with a crew of thirty and an armament of seven
long nines. In addition to these he had the gun-boats _Borer_,
_Centipede_, _Nettle_, _Allen_, _Viper_, and _Burrows_, mounting each
a long twenty-four and a short eighteen, with the _Wilmer_, _Ludlow_,
_Aylwin_, and _Ballard_, each carrying a long twelve. The larger
gun-boats had in all two hundred and forty-six men and the smaller
one hundred and four. On the whole, the squadron carried crews that
aggregated eight hundred and eighty-two men, and eighty-six guns that
threw at a broadside 1,194 pounds of shot, of which four hundred and
eighty pounds were from long guns and seven hundred and fourteen from
short.
Because so small a weight of shot was thrown from long guns, and
because the American force has been so grossly misrepresented by the
British historians, it is proper here to remind the reader of the very
great superiority of long over short guns. The fact that short guns
(carronades) went out of use long ago is sufficient proof of this, but
it is just as well to keep in mind that the short thirty-twos such as
were used in the battle of Lake Champlain, could bear a charge of but
two and a half pounds of powder, at most, while a long twenty-four,
the shot of which was four-tenths of an inch less in diameter, used a
charge of not less than five pounds, and it could stand a pound and
even two pounds more. By the tables of ranges given by Sir Howard
Douglas in his famous work on gunnery, Macdonough’s short thirty-twos
could carry but two hundred yards with an elevation of one-half of a
degree (at point-blank the range was less than one hundred yards) while
the long twenty-fours of the British fleet, at an elevation of one-half
of a degree, carried five hundred yards. This is the range at which the
ball would strike smooth water when fired from a point five feet four
inches above the water. It would bound along much farther, of course,
but the figures are worth quoting, to show approximately the difference
in penetrating power of the long gun and the short gun.
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