be used for them instead of the relatively softer non-cemented. K.C.
is not applicable to curved surfaces, for which reason barbettes,
casemates, and batteries with curved portholes in them and rounded
turrets cannot be constructed of it. Flat-sided turrets consist of
a number of flat plates placed to meet each other at predetermined
angles, thus forming one homogeneous whole.
These battleships were:--
============+============+===========+============
Name. | Laid down. | Built at. | Engines by.
------------+------------+-----------+------------
_London_ | Dec. ’98 | Portsmouth| Earle
_Bulwark_ | March, ’99 | Devonport | Hawthorn
_Venerable_ | Nov. ’99 | Chatham | Maudslay
============+============+===========+============
All were completed in 1902.
The cruisers of the same year, the _Drake_ class, were “improved”
_Cressies_, with increased displacement, power and speed. The increased
displacement allowed of four extra 6-inch guns being mounted, these
being placed in casemates on top of the amidships casemates.
Particulars of the _Drake_ class:--
Displacement--14,000 tons.
Length--(over all) 529½ft.
Beam--71ft.
Draught--(maximum) 28ft.
Armament--Two 9.2, 45 cal. (instead of 40 cal., as in the
_Cressies_), sixteen 6-inch, 45 cal., and fourteen 12-pounders,
two submerged tubes (18in.).
Armour--2,700 tons, as in _Cressy_, except that the casemates are
6in. thick.
Horse-power--30,000 = 23 knots. Boilers, 43 Belleville.
Coal--(normal) 1,250 tons; (maximum) 2,500.
These ships were altogether superior to the _Cressy_ class. On trial
they all easily made their contract speeds and subsequently greatly
exceeded them. It was discovered that increased speed was to be
obtained by additional weight aft, and this was so much brought to a
fine art that weights were adjusted accordingly, and in one of them,
seeking to make a speed record, the entire crew were once mustered aft
in order to vary the trim!
Building details are as follows:--
===============+============+==========+===========+==============
Name. | Laid down. |Completed.| Built at. | Engines by.
---------------+------------+----------+-----------+--------------
_Good Hope_ | Sept. ’99 | 1902 | Fairfield | Fairfield
_Drake_ | April, ’99 | 1902 | Pembroke | Humphrys & T.
_Leviathan_ | Nov. ’99 | 1903 | Clydebank | Clydebank
_King Alfred_ | Aug. ’99 | 1903 | Vickers | Vickers
===============+============+==========+===========+==============
For some years these were the fastest ships in the world. In 1905, in
a race by the Second Cruiser Squadron across the Atlantic, with ships
of nominally equal speed, the _Drake_ came in first. In December, 1906,
at four-fifths power for thirty hours, she averaged 22.5 knots. In
1907, the _King Alfred_ averaged 25.1 knots for one hour, and made an
eight hours’ mean of 24.8. They proved very economical steamers, being
able to do nineteen knots at an expenditure of eleven tons of coal an
hour, and though they are now getting old, as warships go, they have
never yet been beaten on the results achieved by horse-power per ton of
displacement.
The Estimates of 1898–99 included a supplementary programme of four
armoured ships which, like the _Canopus_ class, again foreshadowed the
battle cruisers of to-day. These were the famous _Duncan_ class, and
may be described as slightly smaller editions of the _London_, with
armour thickness sacrificed for superior speed. The belt amidships was
reduced from 9in. to 7in., but against this the belt at the extreme
bow was made an inch thicker, and 25ft. away from the ram became
5in. thick. The displacement sank by 1,000 tons, the horse-power was
increased by 3,000, and the speed by one knot.
The total weight of armour is about 3,500 against 4,300 tons in the
_Londons_. The _Duncans_ may be regarded as a species of recrudescence
of Barnaby ideas, plus a later notion that a well-extended partial
protection was better than a more concentrated protection of less
area. Generally speaking, they were improved duplicates of the
_Canopus_ class, in the same way that the _Formidable_ and the ships
that followed her were duplicates of the _Majestic_. Two ideas
were obviously at work. In other forms these two ideas have (with
variations) existed to the present day. Then it was purely a question
between ratios devoted to speed and protection. To-day (1912) matters
have been so far modified that increased displacements are given to
secure speed advantages, but protection remains proportionately as it
was. Reduced armament has always been accepted.
Construction details of the _Duncans_, of which two more figured in the
estimates for 1899–1900:--
============+============+==============+=============
Name. | Laid down. | Built at. | Engines by.
------------+------------+--------------+-------------
_Duncan_ | July, ’99 | Thames, I.W. | Thames, I.W.
_Russell_ | March, ’99 | Palmer | Palmer
_Cornwallis_| July, ’99 | Thames, I.W. | Thames, I.W.
_Exmouth_ | Aug. ’99 | Laird | Laird
_Albemarle_ | Jan. ’00 | Chatham | Thames, I.W.
_Montagu_ | Nov. ’99 | Devonport | Laird
============+============+==============+=============
The _Montagu_ was wrecked on Lundy Island in 1906.
Contemporaneous with the _Drakes_, and extending over four ships in
the Estimates of 1898–99 to two in the following and four in the year
later, ten armoured cruisers were provided for, which in essence were
little but an attempt to provide a normal second-class protected
cruiser of the _Talbot_ class, with armour protection. These ships--the
_County_ class--are of 9,800 tons displacement, and may also be
regarded as diminutives of the _Drake_ and _Cressy_ classes, with a
touch of the _Diadems_ thrown in. In place of the fore and aft 9.2’s
of the _Drake_ and _Cressy_, they were supplied with a couple of pairs
of 6-inch guns mounted in turrets fore and aft. The belt amidships
was reduced to 4in. (a thickness in K.C. which has no virtues over
armour of earlier type) with the usual extension of 2in. to the bow.
The twin turrets, in which, like those of the _Powerful_, electrical
control was once more introduced, have never given satisfaction, being
very cramped for working purposes, and probably no more efficient than
single gun turrets would have been, certainly less than the single gun
7--5in. turrets, originally proposed as an alternative, would have been.
Had the ships been regarded frankly as modern variants of the
second-class protected cruisers, they probably would have been esteemed
more than they were. Unfortunately they have always been regarded as
“armoured ships” and discounted on account of their obvious inferiority
to the _Drakes_. In the matter of steaming all of them have invariably
done well (except in the case of the _Essex_, over which a mistake in
design was made). The anticipated twenty-three knots was made quite
easily, once certain early propeller difficulties were overcome. The
Boiler Commission, already referred to, affected these ships, in so far
that, instead of the hitherto inevitable Bellevilles, the _Berwick_ and
_Suffolk_ were given Niclausse boilers and the _Cornwall_ Babcocks. The
total weight of armour is 1,800 tons.
Details of the construction of this class are:--
==============+===========+==============+==============
Name. | Laid down.| Built at. | Engines by.
--------------+-----------+------------- +--------------
_Essex_ | Jan. ’00 | Pembroke | Clydebank
_Kent_ | Feb. ’00 | Portsmouth | Hawthorn
_Bedford_ | Feb. ’00 | Fairfield | Fairfield
_Monmouth_ | Aug. ’99 | L. & Glasgow | L. & Glasgow
_Lancaster_ | Mar. ’01 | Elswick | Hawthorn L.
_Berwick_ | April, ’01| Beardmore | Humphrys
_Donegal_ | Feb. ’01 | Fairfield | Fairfield
_Cornwall_ | Mar. ’01 | Pembroke | Hawthorn
_Cumberland_ | Feb. ’01 | L. & Glasgow | L. & Glasgow
_Suffolk_ | Mar. ’02 | Portsmouth | Humphrys & T.
==============+===========+==============+==============
All were completed during 1903 and 1904.
For the year 1900–01 only two battleships were provided: the _Queen_,
built at Devonport and engined by Harland and Wolff, and the _Prince
of Wales_, built at Chatham and engined by the Greenock Foundry Co.
These were laid down in 1901 and completed in 1904. They were copies of
the _Londons_ in every detail, saving that, instead of being enclosed,
their upper deck batteries were left open as in the _Duncans_. The
_Queen_ was given Babcock boilers instead of Bellevilles.
The 1901–02 Estimates provided three battleships and six armoured
cruisers of the _County_ class. These were the last ships designed
by Sir William White. The battleships, of which eight were built
altogether--three for 1901–02, two for the next year--were of a
different type from any which had preceded them, and to some extent may
be said to mark the birth of the _Dreadnought_ era. That is to say, in
them the old idea of the two calibres, 12in. and 6in., died out, and
heavier auxiliary guns began to appear.
Particulars of these ships, _the King Edward VII_ class, are as
follows:--
Displacement--16,350 tons.
Length--(over all) 453¾ft.
Beam--78ft.
Draught--(maximum) 26¾ft.
Armament--Four 12-inch, 40 cal., four 9.2, 45 cal., ten 6-inch,
45 cal., twelve 12-pounders, fourteen 3-pounders, five 18-inch
submerged tubes (of which one is in the stern).
Armour--As in the _London_ (but a 6in. battery instead of
casemates).
Horse-power--18,000 = 18.9 knots.
Coal--(normal) 950 tons; (maximum) 2,150 tons, also 400 tons of
oil, except in the _New Zealand_.
==============================+===========+============+==============
Name. | Laid down.| Built at. | Engines by.
------------------------------+-----------+------------+--------------
_Commonwealth_ | June, ’01 | Fairfield | Fairfield
_King Edward_ | Mar. ’02 | Devonport | Harland & W.
_Dominion_ | May, ’02 | Vickers | Vickers
_Hindustan_ | Oct. ’02 | Clydebank | Clydebank
_New Zealand_ (now _Zelandia_)| Feb. ’03 | Portsmouth | Humphrys & T.
_Africa_ | Jan. ’04 | Chatham | Clydebank
_Britannia_ | Feb. ’04 | Portsmouth | Humphrys & T.
_Hibernia_ | Jan. ’04 | Devonport | Harland & W.
==============================+===========+============+==============
Except the last three, all were completed in 1905. The others were
completed very shortly afterwards.
The boilers fitted to these ships varied considerably. The _King
Edward_, _Hindustan_, and _Britannia_ were given a mixed installation
of Babcocks and cylindricals; the _New Zealand_ Niclausse boilers;
the other ships Babcock only. In the _Britannia_, super-heaters were
also fitted to six of her boilers. The point differentiating these
ships from their predecessors was the mounting of four 9.2 guns in
single turrets at the angles of the superstructure. Equally novel was
the placing of 6-inch guns in a battery behind the armour on the main
deck.[21] Fighting tops, a feature of all previous ships, disappeared,
and in place of them fire-control platforms were substituted.
When produced, these ships were considered as something like the “last
word”; but in service later on it was very soon found that the two
calibres of big guns rendered fire-control extremely difficult, and
they have been a somewhat costly lesson in that respect. They cost
about £1,500,000 each, and were found to be all that could be desired
tactically, their turning circles with engines being only about 340yds.
at fifteen knots. All of them did not make their speeds on trials, and
some have never quite come up to expectations in that respect, but
they have all proved remarkably reliable steamers.
Six armoured cruisers provided for in the 1901–02 Estimates were the
_Devonshires_. These were originally intended to have been enlarged
_Counties_, carrying a single 7.5 fore and aft, in place of the twin
6-inch turrets of the prototype ships. The design was, however,
modified to the extent of substituting a single 7.5 for each of the
forward pairs of 6-inch casemates.
Details of these ships are:--
Displacement--10,850 tons.
Length (between perpendiculars)--450ft.
Beam--68½ft.
Draught--(maximum) 25½ft.
Armament--Four 7.5, six 6-inch, 45 cal.; two 12-pounders,
twenty-two 3-pounders, two 18in. torpedo tubes submerged.
Armour Belt--(length 325ft. from the bow, width 10½ft.), 6in.
amidships, thinning to 2in. right forward. Barbettes 6in. Turrets
5in. Casemates 6in.
Horse-power--21,000==22.5 knots.
Coal--(normal) 800; (maximum) 1,800 tons.
Other details are:--
================+============+==================+==============
Name. | Laid down. | Built at. | Engined by.
----------------+------------+------------------+--------------
_Devonshire_ | Mar. ’02 | Chatham | Thames I.W.
_Antrim_ | Aug. ’02 | Clydebank | Clydebank
_Argyll_ | Sept. ’02 | Greenock Foundry | Greenock F.C.
_Carnarvon_ | Oct. ’02 | Beardmore | Beardmore
_Hampshire_ | Sept. ’02 | Elswick | Elswick
_Roxburgh_ | June, ’02 | L. & Glasgow | L. & Glasgow
================+============+==================+==============
Like the _King Edwards_, various boilers were given to them. All
of them have one-fifth cylindrical boilers. The _Devonshire_ and
_Carnarvon_ were otherwise given Niclausse; _Antrim_ and _Hampshire_,
Yarrow; _Argyll_, Babcock; and _Roxburgh_, Dürr. The designed speed was
exceeded by all on trials, but none have proved successful steamers
ever since. They were completed between 1904 and 1905.
These were the last ships to be designed by Sir William White. He
resigned his position from ill-health; but, like his predecessors, left
under a cloud--at any rate, with his services not really appreciated.
He had created a magnificent fleet; but its very magnificence made many
of his designs look poor on paper against any foreign construction of
less displacement, but--_on paper_--of equal or superior qualities. It
is the fate of the naval architect in peace-time to be judged on paper
with small regard to issues such as nautical qualities, constructional
strength, and a score of other details which are not to be expressed
by any statistical formulæ, but yet make all the difference between
efficiency and the absence of it.
[Illustration: EARLY TYPE OF “27 KNOT” DESTROYERS.]
Sir William White’s period of office was marked by an almost
complete naval revolution. It began with the quick-firer and the
disappearance of the low freeboard battleships. It ended with the
coming of submarines, fire-control, and wireless. In between, it
included the coming of the destroyer, the re-birth of the armoured
cruiser; the arrival of the water-tube boiler, new forms of hull,
unprecedented advances in both guns and armour--in fact, almost every
conceivable change. Through these troubled waters with a steady hand
and cool brain Sir William White guided the destiny of the Fleet and
the millions of pounds expended in shipbuilding. Already his era
is “the pre-_Dreadnought_” one, and to present-day ideas the term
“pre-_Dreadnought_” is already very nearly akin to “pre-historic.”
His creations preserved the peace, for which very reason they failed
to secure glory. Already some have gone to the scrap-heap, and others
are well on their way thither to join the Reed and Barnaby ships in
that oblivion to which modern _Dreadnoughts_ will just as surely go in
their season. More might be said: but _cui bono?_ Such public epitaph
as Sir William White received when he retired was of the “about time,
too!” order. The creator of the finest fleet that the world has ever
seen left office with less honour and no more public interest than did
half-a-dozen mediocre admirals who had chanced to fly their flags in
some of his creations. It is not given for the stage manager to stand
in the lime-light reserved for the principal actors. But the historian
of a hundred years hence, placing great Englishmen in perspective, will
assuredly place Sir William White far ahead of many who loom greater in
the public eye to-day.
_GUNS IN THE ERA._
The guns which especially belong to the White era are as follows:--
===============+========+============+=========+============================
Designation. | Weight.| Projectile.| Velocity| Maximum Penetration with
| Tons. | lbs. | f.s. | capped shot against K.C. at
| | | +------------+---------------
| | | | 5000 yds. | 3000 yds.
---------------+--------+------------+---------+------------+---------------
13.5, 30 cal. | 67 | 1250 | 2016 | 9 | 12
| | | | |
12in., 35 cal. | 46 | 850 | 2367 | 11½ | 14½
12in., 40 cal. | 50 | 850 | 2750 | 16 | 20
| | | | |
10in., 32 cal. | 29 | 500 | 2040 | 5½ | 7½
| | | | |
9.2, 30 cal. | 24 | 380 | 2065 | 4 | 6
9.2, 40 cal. | 25 | 380 | 2347 | 6¾ | 9¼
9.2, 45 cal. | 27 | 380 | 2640 | 8¾ | 11¼
| | | | |
7.5, 45 cal. | 14 | 200 | 2600 | 5¾ | 7½
| | | | |
6in., 40 cal. | 7½ | 100 | 2200 | -- | --
| | | | |
6in., 45 cal. | 7 | 100 | 2535 | -- | 4½
===============+========+============+=========+============+===============
_PURCHASED SHIPS._
In the year 1902 two ships, the _Constitucion_ and _Libertad_, were
laid down at Elswick and Vickers-Maxims’ respectively for the Chilian
Government. They were designed by Sir Edward Reed, and compare
interestingly with the _King Edwards_ in being much longer and
narrower. It will be remembered that in the past Reed ideals had always
centred round a “short handy ship.” They had also always embodied the
maximum of protection, while these ships carried medium armour only.
His ships had, further, always been characterised by extremely strong
construction, while these verged on the flimsy, the scantlings being
far lighter than in British naval practice.
Out of all which it has been held that they represented the Reed ideal
of armoured cruisers interlaced with whatever limitations the Chilian
authorities may have specified.
Particulars of these ships, which in 1903 were purchased for the
British Navy and renamed _Swiftsure_ (ex _Constitucion_) and _Triumph_
(ex _Libertad_):--
Displacement--11,800. Complement, 700.
Length--(over all) 470ft.
Beam--71ft.
Draught--(Maximum) 24ft. 8in.
Armament--Four 10-inch, 45 cal.; fourteen 7.5-inch, 50 cal.;
fourteen 14-pounders, four 6-pounders, four Maxims; two 18-inch
submerged tubes.
Armour--Practically complete belt 8ft. wide, 7-inch thick
amidships, reduced to 3-inch at ends. 10-inch bulkheads at ends
of thick portion of belt. Redoubt above (250ft. long), 7-inch on
sides 6-inch bulkheads to it. Deck 1½-inch on slopes amidships,
3-inch on slopes at ends. Barbettes 10-inch, with 8 to 6-inch
turrets. Battery and upper deck casemates, 7-inch.
Horse-power--14,000 = 20 knots. Yarrow boilers.
Coal--(normal) 800 tons; (maximum) 2,000 tons.
These ships compare interestingly with the _King Edwards_ and
_Devonshires_, between which they struck a mean, as follows:--
===============+=================+===============+===============
| _King Edward._ | _Swiftsure._ | _Devonshire._
---------------+-----------------+---------------+---------------
Displacement | 16,350 | 11,800 |10,850
Principal Guns | 4--12in. | 4--10in. | 4--7.5.
| 4--9.2 | 14--7.5 | 6--6in.
| 16--6in. | |
| 5--18in. tubes | 2--18in. tubes| 2--18in. tubes
---------------+-----------------+---------------+---------------
Armour belt | 9--2in. | 7--3in. | 6--2in.
Speed | 18.9 knots | 20 knots | 22.25 knots
Coal (Normal) | 950 | 800 | 800
Coal (Maximum) | 2,150--400 (oil)| 2,000 | 1,800
===============+=================+===============+===============
Other items of interest are that the armament of the _Swiftsures_
(10-inch and 7.5’s) had somewhere about that time been laid down by
Admiral Fisher as the ideal armament of the future, on the principle
that the best possible was “the smallest effective big gun, and the
largest possible secondary gun.”
In service these ships never proved brilliantly successful. They rarely
managed to make their speeds successfully, and there was a great deal
of vibration with them. They were shored up internally in places with a
view to strengthening them. On the other hand, it should be mentioned
that some of these alleged defects have been put down to conservatism
in nautical ideas, and that the shoring up was not really required.
Their great drawback was that so far as the British Navy was concerned
they were neither one thing nor the other, being too light in heavy
guns to be satisfactory with the battleships, and too slow to act with
the cruisers. Had there been six or so of them they would, possibly
enough, have formed an ideal squadron. Being two ships only, they of
necessity became round pegs in square holes.
_NAVAL ESTIMATES IN THE ERA._
===========+=============+============+=====================================
Financial | | | Ships.
Year. | Amount. | Personnel. +--------------+-----------+----------
| | | | Armoured | Protected
| | | Battleships. | Cruisers. | Cruisers.
-----------+-------------+------------+--------------+-----------+----------
1887–88 | 12,476,800 | 62,500 | -- | -- | 3
1888–89[22]| 13,082,800 | 62,500 | -- | -- | 2
1889–90 | 13,685,400 | 62,400 | -- | -- | --
1890–91 | 13,786,600 | 65,400 | 8 | -- | 42
1891–92 | 14,557,856 | 68,800 | 2 | -- | --
1892–93 | 14,240,200 | 67,700 | 1 | -- | --
1893–94 | 14,340,000 | 70,500 | 6 | -- | 2
1894–95 | 17,365,900 | 83,000 | 3 | -- | 9
1895–96 | 18,701,000 | 88,850 | -- | -- | 8
1896–97 | 21,823,000 | 93,750 | 6 | -- | 3
1897–98 | 21,838,000 | 100,050 | 7 | 6 | --
1898–99 | 23,780,000 | 106,390 | 3 | 4 | --
1899–00 | 26,594,000 | 110,640 | 2 | 2 | 1
1900–01 | 28,791,900 | 114,880 | 2 | 6 | 1
1901–02 | 30,875,500 | 118,625 | 3 | 6 | --
1902–03 | 31,255,500 | 122,500 | 2 | 2 | --
===========+=============+============+==============+===========+==========
In the following year 1903–04 three ships (the last of the _King
Edwards_) were provided for. The total number of battleships designed
for the British Navy by Sir William White was therefore 48. There were
in addition 26 armoured cruisers--making a total of 74 armoured ships,
and about as many protected cruisers, including some for Colonial
service.
III.
THE WATTS ERA.
Sir William White was succeeded by Mr., afterwards Sir Philip Watts,
who came to the Admiralty from Elswick, where he had been Chief
Constructor. He came with the reputation of “putting in plenty of
guns,” and his appointment was favourably received, both inside the
Navy and outside.
The armoured cruisers _Duke of Edinburgh_ and _Black Prince_ were the
first ships for which he was personally responsible.
Details of these:--
Displacement--13,550 tons.
Length (between perpendiculars)--480ft.
Beam--73½ft.
Draught--(maximum) 27½ft.
Armament--Six 9.2, 45 cal., ten 6-inch, 50 cal.; twenty-two
3-pounders. Torpedo tubes:--Three submerged (18in.).
Horse-power--23,500 = 22.3 knots.
Coal--(normal) 1,000 tons; (maximum) 2,000; also 400 tons of oil.
The former ship was laid down at Pembroke and engined by Hawthorn; the
latter was built and engined by the Thames Iron Works. In the matter
of armament and its arrangement the ships were to some extent cruiser
versions of the _King Edward_; but equally, in the adoption of a number
of single gun-houses for big guns, and the jump from two to a larger
number of big guns, the influence of the Chilian _O’Higgins_, built
at Elswick, may be noticed. The big guns were placed one forward and
one aft, two on either beam and two on either quarter. The 6-inch
were placed in an armoured battery below. As originally designed,
right ahead fire was given to the forward battery guns, but this was
dispensed with at a later date. The ships were never good sea boats,
and the 6-inch guns were soon found to be well-nigh useless in any sea.
The armour was disposed in generous fashion--a complete belt reaching
up to the main deck, 4in. forward, 6in. for some 260ft. amidships, and
3in. aft of that. A 6in. battery (K.N.C.) with bulkheads surmounts the
belt-7in. barbettes with 6in. K.C. flat-sided gunhouses.
Both were given a mixed installation of Babcock and cylindrical
boilers. A novelty was the standardisation of all their machinery, a
very valuable innovation, which has been followed ever since. Parts of
any one ship’s machinery can be used for any other of her class, thus
facilitating rapid repairs and requiring a considerably reduced stock
of spares.