106. REPORT—1862. 
which may be looked upon as the price to be paid for increased velocity, 
he can get an initial velocity much greater than that of the smooth-bore. 
But is the result worth the price paid? Not if a more efficient compromise 
can be obtained. I use the word “ compromise” advisedly, because I think 
that every one who has had experience in artillery practice will agree with 
me that the best results are only to be obtained by means of the best com- 
promise. You cannot have long projectiles and very high velocities without 
burning too much powder and taking too much out of your gun, or else 
making it an unwieldy monster. 
The problem we have placed before us now is, How can artillery be best 
adapted for attacking armour-defences ? The advocates of the smooth-bore are 
satisfied with one condition—high velocity. Mr. Whitworth objects, and says, 
“If velocity were all that is needed, I can get more than you do in the pro- 
portion of 22 to 16; but to sacrifice all to velocity is a bad compromise to 
effect a solution of the penetration-problem. You set down velocity as greatest 
possible, form of projectile of no account, material of no account, and after 
all can do nothing at an ordinary fighting-range while you wrongly take it as 
proved that ‘shells are of no avail’ against iron-plated ships. It would be 
a far better compromise to be satisfied with a lower velocity, getting however 
all you can at a fair price, and combining therewith conditions one and two— 
-proper form and proper material for the projectile.” Let us now compare 
the actual results obtained in the way of penetration by the Armstrong 110- 
pounder (the proposed naval gun), the old 68-pounder smooth-bore, and the 
two naval Whitworth guns lately fired at Shoeburyness. 
Powder-| Penetration into Armours 
Gun. Range. | Projectile. charge. plate. 
armaons pS Rece 200 | 110 Ib. solid. | 14 Ibs. | 13 to 2 inches. 
ols aa smooth-|' 999 | 68 Ib. solid. | 16 Ibs. | 2} to 3 inches. 
{7othanas 
et ine Spender: and shell, [| 22 1b8- | Through plate and backing. 
Whitworth 120-pounder, | | go 
7-inch bore.........+++008 
5c en SNES TS eee U EEE! 
130 Ib. shell. | 25 Ibs. | Through plate and backing. 
The first two results* will lead every one to the same conclusion that it is 
to be presumed they led the Ordnance Committee, viz. that the Armstrong 
rifled gun is a worse compromise than the old gun it was intended to super- 
sede. The reason may be inferred from the facts to be, that besides neglect- 
ing conditions one and two, form and material of projectile, it is very much 
behind in respect of condition three, velocity ; this is to be attributed to the 
weak construction of the gun, which cannot fire with safety efficient charges 
of powder, and to the use of the lead-coated projectiles. Taking all the 
results, they show themselves to be indisputably in favour of the Whitworth,— 
the old 68-pounder coming second, and the Armstrong last. Let us next 
examine how they stand in regard to velocity, as shown in the following 
Table, which, like the one given above, is compiled from official sources. 
* These results were subsequently much surpassed. The Whitworth 70-pounder pene- 
trated 44-inch plate and backing with shell at 600 yards range, and the Whitworth 120- 
pounder fired its shot and shell through 5-inch plate and 18 inches of teak-backing and 
$-inch iron-plate skin at 800 yards’ range. , 
PD 
