ordinary flat deck on top of the belt, a sloping deck behind the belt
was first introduced. This system--rigidly adhered to in the British
Navy ever since, and copied eventually into every other Navy--was
based upon the idea of reinforcing the deck-protected cruiser with
side armour. The principle involved was that at whatever angle the
belt might be hit and penetrated, the incoming projectile would then
meet a further obstruction at a 45° angle, calculated to present a
maximum of deflecting resistance. Professor Hovgaard and others have
since indicated that, weight for weight, three inches of inclined
deck armour, having to be spread more, represent as much or more
tons as six inches of vertical armour (the nominal equivalent), and
protective decks behind armour are to-day much thinner than of yore
and little better than “splinter decks.” The principle, however,
remains, as originated by Sir William White, and is, perhaps, the most
characteristic feature of his era: seeing how universally the idea was
copied.
The French were the last to adopt it. Instead, they used the flat deck
below the belt in addition to the one on top of it. This was made use
of so late as the _République_ and _Liberté_ class. While ideally
better for resisting projectiles which might penetrate the belt, it
was impossible of really practical application amidships on account of
the difficulty of keeping the engines entirely below it.
[Illustration:
PROTECTED CRUISER.
ROYAL SOVEREIGN.
RENOWN.
SUFFREN (FRENCH)
SYSTEMS OF WATER-LINE PROTECTION.]
The _Renown_ was the first ship to carry all her secondary guns in
casemates. She was fitted as a flagship, and first served on the
North American Station. When Admiral Fisher went from there to the
Mediterranean he took the _Renown_ with him as flagship, presumably
with the idea that speed was better than power in a flagship. The
_Renown’s_ fighting power was small even then, but she was well fitted
for the social side of flagship work--so nicely, indeed, that the
flash-plates of the big guns had been taken up so as not to interfere
with ladies’ shoes in dances!
After leaving the Mediterranean the _Renown_ was still further
converted into a “battleship yacht,” the six-inch guns being removed.
She was painted white, and used to convey the then Prince of Wales to
India. Thereafter she practically disappeared from the effective list
and eventually became a training ship for stokers.
The _Renown_ was followed by the ships of the Spencer programme,
nine battleships of the _Majestic_ class, which were spread over the
1893–94 Estimates, and those of the next year. The _Majestics_ were in
substance amplified _Renowns_, their special and particular feature
being that in place of the two amidships belt of varying thickness a
single belt of 16ft. wide of a uniform 9in. thickness was substituted.
In the _Majestics_, the 13.5, which had been for so long the standard
gun for first-class battleships, disappeared in favour of a new type
of 12-inch, a Mark VIII. of 35 calibres. The two types compare as
follows:--
=====+=======+=======+===========+=================================
| | | |Maximum Penetration against K.C.
Bore.|Length.|Weight.|Projectile.| (capped projectiles).
Inch.| Cals. | Tons. | lbs. | at 5000 yds. | at 3000 yds.
| | | | in. | in.
-----+-------+-------+-----------+-----------------+---------------
13.5 | 30 | 67 | 1250 | 9 | 12
| | | | |
12 | 35 | 46 | 850 | 11½ | 14½
=====+=======+=======+===========+=================+===============
The new gun was, therefore, superior in everything except weight of
projectile, and that was not considered much in those days. To-day, of
course, it has quite a special meaning.
In the _Majestics_, except in the first two, all-round loading
positions for the big guns were introduced in place of the cumbersome
old system whereby, after firing, the guns had to return to an end-on
position, tilt up, and at a fixed angle take their charges at what was
little but an adaption for breechloaders of the loading system evolved
twenty years before for the old _Inflexible_.
Details of these ships:--
Displacement--14,900 tons.
Length--(between perpendiculars) 390ft., (over-all) 413ft.
Beam--75ft.
Draught--(mean), 27½ ft., (maximum) about 30ft.
Armament--Four 12-inch 35 cal., twelve 6-inch 40 cal., sixteen
12-pounders, twelve 3-pounders. Torpedo tubes (18-inch), four
submerged and one above water in stern.
Armour (Harvey)--Belt, (220ft. by 16ft.) 9in. Bulkheads, 14in.
Barbettes, 14in. with 10in. turrets. Casemates, 6in.
Horse-power--12,000 = 17.5 knots.
Coal--(normal) 1,200 tons; (maximum) 2,200 tons = nominal radius of
7,600 miles at 10 knots and 4,000 at 15 knots.
The ships were built, etc., as follows:--
================+============+=============+==================
Name. | Laid down. | Builder. | Engined by
----------------+------------+-------------+------------------
_Magnificent_ | Dec. ’93 | Chatham | Penn
_Majestic_ | Feb. ’94 | Portsmouth | Vickers
_Hannibal_ | April, ’94 | Pembroke | Harland & Wolff
_Victorious_ | May, ’94 | Chatham | Hawthorn, Leslie
_Mars_ | June, ’94 | Laird | Laird
_Prince George_ | Sept. ’94 | Portsmouth | Humphrys
_Jupiter_ | Oct. ’94 | Clydebank | Clydebank
_Cæsar_ | March, ’95 | Portsmouth | Maudslay
_Illustrious_ | March, 95 | Chatham | Penn
================+============+=============+==================
Mostly they were completed inside two years, the only ones which took
appreciably longer being the _Hannibal_ and the _Illustrious_. In these
and the _Cæsar_ an innovation introduced in the others--the placing of
the chart house round the base of the foremast with the conning tower
well clear ahead--was done away with, and the old system of the bridge
over the conning tower reverted to. In the _Cæsar_ and _Illustrious_,
laid down later than the others, an improvement was effected by
the introduction of circular instead of pear-shaped barbettes. The
_Majestic_, _Magnificent_, and _Cæsar_ were built in dry dock instead
of on slips--the first instance of this since the days of early
coast-defence monitors.
The total cost was approximately a million per ship.
On trials most of them exceeded the designed speed, but all were light
on trials. They proved very handy ships, with circles of 450 yards at
fifteen knots. Coal consumption was always high.
Compared to the _Sovereigns_, the following figures are of interest:--
=============+============+=========+==========+=======+========
| | | Weight of| |
|Displacement|Weight of|Armament &| |Normal
Name. | (tons). | Armour |Ammunition| | Coal
| | (tons). | (tons). | H.P. |(tons).
-------------+------------+---------+----------+-------+--------
_Majestics_ | 14,900 | 4260 | 1500 |12,000 | 1200
_Sovereigns_ | 14,100 | 4600 | 1410 |13,000 | 900
=============+============+=========+==========+=======+========
The total dead weight carried in armament, armour, and coal thus works
out at practically the same figure, despite the rise of 800 tons in
displacement. On these grounds certain attacks were made upon the
ships, mainly by those who argued against the unarmoured ends. The
criticisms were, however, mainly of the captious order--the ships were
certainly the finest specimens of naval architecture of their day.
At a later date electric hoists were fitted to the 6-inch guns, and
400 tons of oil fuel were added to the fuel capacity (the maximum coal
capacity being reduced by 200 tons). The first ship to be so fitted was
the _Mars_. Another innovation was shifting the torpedo nets, first in
the _Mars_, then in all the others, from the upper deck to the main
deck level; the idea being to keep the nets clear of the 6-inch guns.
The _Majestic_ and _Magnificent_ served for a long time as flagships in
the Channel Fleet. Admiral Sir F. Stephenson and Sir A. K. Wilson flew
their flags in the _Majestic_, of which ship Prince Louis of Battenberg
was at one time captain.
It was during the early service of the _Majestics_ in the Channel Fleet
that “invisible” colours for warships first came into consideration,
all ships up to that date being painted with black hulls, white upper
works, and yellow masts and funnels. For these experiments the
_Magnificent_ was painted black all over, the _Majestic_ and _Hannibal_
were given grey and light green upper works respectively. The latter
was really the more “invisible” of the two, but both ships were left
with black hulls. Ultimately a grey, a little darker than that which
the Germans had long used, was adopted as the regulation, though for
some time it varied greatly between ship and ship, following the old
system under which a good deal of latitude in painting was allowed.[17]
To this era, 1894–95, belong two groups of protected cruisers, the
_Powerfuls_ and the _Talbots_. The latter, nine in all, were merely
enlarged (5,600 tons) editions of the later cruisers of the Naval
Defence Act, and call for no comment. The former group were the
_Powerful_ and _Terrible_, “replies” to the Russian _Rurik_ and
_Rossiya_. They displaced nearly as much as the battleships--14,200
tons--and ran to the then unheard of length of 500ft. between
perpendiculars. They carried no belt armour whatever, but were given
stout protective decks, no less than 6in. on the slopes amidships.
The two big guns (40 calibre, 9.2) were given 6in. Harvey barbettes,
the twelve other guns[18] (6-inch) being in 6-inch casemates. Sixteen
12-pounders were disposed about the upper works. Designed horse-power
25,000 = 22 knots. Total bunker capacity of 3,000 tons, equal to a
nominal 7,000 miles at fourteen knots. Both ships were laid down in
1894, the _Powerful_ by Vickers and the _Terrible_ at Clydebank. They
were launched in the following year.
In service the _Powerfuls_ proved capable of keeping up a speed of
twenty knots almost indefinitely. For the rest, they were unhandy ships
with large turning circles. At the time of the South African War, both
of them were at the Cape, and did service with landed naval brigades.
Of these, one from the _Powerful_, with some 4.7’s on special Percy
Scott gun-carriages, materially assisted in the defence of Ladysmith.
During the year 1911 the decision was come to that it was not worth
while preserving either ship, on account of the large crews required
and their comparatively small fighting value under modern conditions.
Two considerable novelties were embodied in these ships. The first of
these was the adoption of electrical gear for the big guns. The other
and more far-reaching was the adoption of Belleville boilers.
_THE BATTLE OF THE BOILERS._
Owing to favourable reports of their use in the French Navy, Belleville
boilers were in 1895 experimentally fitted to the _Sharpshooter_,
torpedo gunboat; but the decision to adopt them in large ships was
taken from French rather than any British experience. Trouble and
failure were freely predicted. With the result frequently attending
lugubrious predictions, very little trouble has ever been experienced
with any type and then only in the very early stage when the water-tube
boiler was an almost unknown curiosity to the engine-room staff.
The chief advantages claimed for Belleville boilers were the higher
working pressures, economy in maintenance and fuel consumption, saving
of weight, rapid steam raising, and great facility for repairs.
[Illustration: WHITE ERA BATTLESHIPS OF THE MAJESTIC CLASS]
The Belleville was the first water-tube boiler to come
into prominence; other types, however, soon appeared. In the
period 1895–98, torpedo gunboats were experimentally fitted as
follows:--_Sharpshooter_, Belleville; _Sheldrake_, Babcock; _Seagull_,
Niclausse; _Spanker_, Du Temple; _Salamander_, Mumford; _Speedy_,
Thornycroft--these three last being of the small tube type. Other
existing types were the Yarrow, White-Foster, Normand, Reed,
Blechynden, all these being of the small tube type also, and regarded
as suitable for small craft only.[19]
In the matter of big ships, so far as the British Navy was concerned,
“water-tube boiler” for some years meant Bellevilles only, whence it
came that in the insensate “Battle of the Boilers,” which presently
broke out, Bellevilles were the main object of attack in Parliament and
elsewhere. Actually, of course, the whole principle was in the melting
pot. All the elements opposed to change in any form rallied to the
attack, led on and influenced in some cases by those whose interests
were bound up with the old style cylindrical boilers. It was all over
again the old story of the fight for the retention of the paddle
against the screw propeller, with an equal disregard for facts.
Unfortunately the party of progress played somewhat into the hands of
the reactionaries. In fitting the Belleville type only, they had not
much alternative, other types being then in a less forward state. The
error made was that in the wholesale adoption of a new type of steam
generator, requiring twice the skill and intelligence necessary for
the old type, it was practically impossible to train quickly enough a
sufficiency of engineers and stokers. Hence troubles soon arose. An
even greater error was that the boilers were mostly built in England
to the French specifications, without, in many cases, sufficient
experienced supervision; and minor “improvements,” such as fusible
plugs and restricting regulations, were introduced by more or less
amateur Admiralty authorities--which also produced trouble.
For example, French practice had taught that adding lime to the feed
water was desirable; but in many British ships this rule was ignored.
Again, one Belleville essential was to throw on coal in very small
quantities at a time, in contradistinction to the old cylindrical
practice in which shovelling on enormous quantities of coal was the
recipe for increased speed. This feature was often disregarded.
The Belleville, ever a complicated and delicate mechanism, if its full
efficiency is to be secured, was a worse boiler for the experiments
than many of the simpler types of to-day would have been. But no
water-tube boiler of any type would have stood any chance of success
against the opposition. There were some terrible times in the boiler
rooms in those days. One or two ships whose chief engineers had been
specially trained in France secured marvellous results, usually by
ignoring Admiralty improvements and regulations.[20] But for one
success there were many early failures.
[Illustration:
EDGAR.
POWERFUL.
DIADEM.
CRESSY.
DRAKE.
COUNTY.
DEVONSHIRE.
PRINCIPAL CRUISERS OF THE WHITE ERA.]
The agitation triumphed to the extent of a Committee of Inquiry being
appointed. An interim report of this Committee made a scape-goat of the
Belleville, to the extent of recommending that no more should be
fitted. But the victory of the retrogrades ended there. A species of
compromise with public opinion inflamed against the water-tube system
was temporarily adopted, and absurd mixed installations of cylindrical
and water-tube boilers were fitted to some ships. Four large tube types
were selected as substitutes for Bellevilles, the Niclausse, Dürr (a
German variant of the Niclausse), the Babcock and Wilcox, and the
Yarrow large tube.
It may approximately be said that every water-tube boiler is a species
of compromise between facility for rapid repair on board ship and
complication, and the need of great care in using and working. It is
usual to put the Belleville at one end of this scale and the Yarrow
(large tube) at the other, this last boiler now requiring little, if
any, more care than the old type of cylindrical.
In the course of comparatively short experiments, both the Niclausse
and the Dürr were found to possess most of the alleged deficiencies of
the Belleville without its advantages; and it was decided to fit all
future types of large ships with the Babcock and Yarrow types only. The
absurd mixture of cylindrical and water-tube boilers was wisely done
away with. Curiously enough, the Belleville boiler, once the agitation
had ceased, also ceased to be troublesome. This was no doubt due to the
increased experience which had been gained in the interim.
Both the Babcock and Yarrow boilers have been immensely improved since
the days when they were first brought out. Something of the same sort
is, of course, true of all the standard types, and there is to-day
hardly any question as to which of them may be the best or worst. Each
type has some special advantage of its own, and in no case, probably,
is that advantage sufficiently pronounced to render any one type
absolutely the best. When adopted by the Admiralty the Belleville was
certainly the best water-tube boiler available. Had it been persisted
in and not “improved” by amateurs it would probably have done quite as
well as any type adopted to-day. The real issue was mainly not one of
type, but of principle. That principle was the water-tube boiler as
opposed to the old type cylindrical.
The Estimates for 1896–97 provided for five battleships which were
somewhat sarcastically alluded to as “improved” _Majestics_. These
ships were the _Canopus_ class, and they mark a species of early
striving after the ideal of the battle-cruisers of to-day. That is
to say, certain sacrifices were made in them with a view to securing
increased speed.
Particulars of these ships:--
Displacement--12,950 tons.
Length--(over all) 418ft.
Beam--74ft.
Draught--(maximum) 26½ft.
Armament--Four 12in., 35 cal., twelve 6in. 40 cal., ten
12-pounders, four submerged tubes (18in.)
Armour--Harvey-Nickel. Belt amidships 6in. with 2in. extension
to the bow and 1½in. skin aft on the water-line. Bulkheads and
barbettes 12in. Turrets 8in.
Horse-power--31,500 = 18.25 knots.
Coal--(normal) 1,000 tons; (maximum) 2,300 tons = nominal radius of
8,000 miles at 10 knots.
The adoption of Harvey-Nickel armour, which was of superior resisting
power to Harvey armour in the ratio of about 5 to 4, partly, but not
entirely accounted for the thinning of the armour of this class.
Theoretically, the 9in. armour belt of the _Majestic_ was equal to
18in. of iron, while the belt of the _Canopus_ class was equal to
about 15in. of iron. In place of the 4in. deck of the _Majestics_, the
_Canopus_ class had only a 2½in. deck. The thin bow (2in.) plating
was introduced as a sop to a public agitation against soft-ended
ships. Such a belt is, of course, perfectly useless against any heavy
projectile, or, for that matter, against 6in., except at very long
range indeed. Sir William White never made any secret of his cynical
disbelief in these bow belts. They were and always have been what
doctors call a “placebo.”
In the following year the sixth ship of this class was built--the
_Vengeance_. She differed from the others in the form of her turrets,
which were flat sided for the first time. In her also a mounting was
first introduced, whereby, in addition to being loaded in any position,
big guns could also be loaded at any elevation.
Some other details of the _Canopus_ class are:--
=============+=============+=================+============+==========
Name. | Built by | Engines by | Laid down. |Completed.
-------------+-------------+-----------------+------------+----------
_Canopus_ | Portsmouth | Greenock | Jan. ’97 | 1900
_Goliath_ | Chatham | Penn | Jan. ’97 | 1900
_Albion_ | Thames I.W. | Maudslay | Dec. ’96 | 1902
_Ocean_ | Devonport | Hawthorn Leslie | Feb. ’97 | 1900
_Glory_ | Laird | Laird | Dec. ’96 | 1901
_Vengeance_ | Vickers | Vickers | Aug. ’97 | 1901
=============+=============+=================+============+==========
The cruisers of the following year were eight cruisers of the much
discussed _Diadem_ class, small editions of the _Powerful_ (11,000
tons), and carrying a pair of 6-inch guns in place of the 9.2’s of the
_Powerfuls_. For the first four (the _Diadem_, _Andromeda_, _Europa_,
and _Niobe_) a speed of 20.5 knots only was provided, but in the late
four (the _Argonaut_, _Ariadne_, _Amphitrite_, and _Spartiate_) the
horse-power was increased to 18,000, in order to provide twenty-one
knots. At the present time (1912) these ships have for all practical
purposes already passed from the effective list, all the weak points of
the _Powerfuls_ being exaggerated in them.
In the Estimates for the years 1895 to 1898, provision was made also
for eleven small third-class cruisers of the “P” class of 2135 tons
and twenty knot speed. The armament consisted of eight 4-inch guns. On
trials most of them did well, but in a very short time their speeds
fell off, and at the present time, such of them as remain on the active
list are slower than the far older cruisers of the _Apollo_ class.
In the Estimates for 1897–98, in addition to the _Vengeance_, already
mentioned, three improved copies of the _Majestic_ were provided. These
ships were:--
===============+============+============+===========
Name. | Laid down. | Built at. | Engines by.
---------------+------------+----------- +-----------
_Formidable_ | March, ’98 | Portsmouth | Earle
_Irresistible_ | April, ’98 | Chatham | Maudslay
_Implacable_ | July, ’98 | Devonport | Laird
===============+============+============+===========
The only difference between them and the _Majestics_ lies in advantage
being taken of improvements in gunnery and armour to increase the
offensive and defensive items. The absurd 2-inch bow belt of the
_Canopus_ was repeated in them, but raised within 2½ft. of the main
deck. A 40-calibre 12-inch was mounted, also a 45-calibre 6-inch.
These were the first ships of the British Navy in which Krupp
cemented armour was used. This armour, generally known as “K.C.,” has
approximately a resisting power three times that of iron armour. That
is to say, the 9in. belts of the _Formidables_ were approximately 33
per cent. more effective than the similar belts of the _Majestics_.
These ships proved faster and more handy, easily exceeding their
designed eighteen knots. The superior handiness was brought about by a
superior form of hull--the deadwood aft being cut away for the first
time in them.
In this year’s Estimates armoured cruisers definitely re-appeared, six
ships of the _Cressy_ type being laid down.
Particulars of these:--
Displacement--12,000 tons.
Length--454ft.
Beam--69½ft.
Draught--(maximum) 28ft.
Armament--Two 9.2, 40 cal., twelve 6-inch, 45 cal., twelve
12-pounders, two 18in. submerged tubes.
Armour--6in. Krupp belt amidships, 250ft. long by 11½ft. wide, 2in.
continuation to the bow. Barbettes 6in. Casemates 5in.
Horse power--21,000 = 21 knots.
Coal--(normal) 800 tons; (maximum) 1,600 tons.
============+============+===========+============
Name. | Laid down. | Built at. | Engines by.
------------+------------+-----------+------------
_Sutlej_ | Aug. ’98 | Clydebank | Clydebank
_Cressy_ | Oct. ’98 | Fairfield | Fairfield
_Aboukir_ | Nov. ’98 | Fairfield | Fairfield
_Hogue_ | July, ’98 | Vickers | Vickers
_Bacchante_ | Dec. ’99 | Clydebank | Clydebank
_Euryalus_ | July, ’99 | Vickers | Vickers
============+============+===========+============
In substance these ships were armoured editions of the _Powerful_. They
steamed very well in their time, but have now fallen off considerably
and are no longer of any importance. Total weight of armour 2,100
tons. An innovation introduced in these ships was the fitting of
non-flammable wood, which at a later date was objected to on the
grounds that it deteriorated the gold lace of the uniforms stored in
drawers made of it. The _Cressy_ was completed in 1901; the others,
excepting the _Euryalus_, in 1902. This latter ship was greatly delayed
from various causes, and not completed until 1903.
The 1898–99 Estimates consisted of three battleships and four armoured
cruisers. The battleships were practically sisters to the _Formidable_,
but differed from her in that the main belt, instead of being a patch
amidships, has a total length of 300ft. from the bow. At the bow it is
2in., quickly increasing to 4in., 5in., 6in., and finally to 9in., and
this provided a measure of protection that the 2in. belts of preceding
ships could never afford. The flat-sided turrets, first introduced in
the _Vengeance_, were also fitted in these ships, the _Formidables_
having the old pattern turrets.