338 
COMMENDED ESSAY, 1898. 
see is not only improbable but impossible* * * § ), flat denial of any appreci¬ 
ably improved results by the disbeliever, and the convenient open mind 
of the unconvinced. 
As in my opinion a discussion on the hypothetical advantages and 
disadvantages of the Q.F. field system would be quite unprofitable 
without endeavouring first to determine, as far as may be, by reference 
to perfectly well-known conditions which cannot vary because of an 
improvement in one portion of a field equipment, what rates of fire we 
may reasonably expect, I have arranged the consideration of the whole 
subject as follows :—• 
(I.) To what causes exactly do the Q.F. guns of ships and forts owe 
their acknowledged superiority in rapidity of fire over existing field 
guns. 
(II.) What are the essentials of Q.F. field gun ? 
(III.) What is the maximum possible rate of fire we may expect from 
a Q.F. field gun under the most favourable conditions ? 
(IY.) How far, having regard to the exigencies of fire control and 
observation of fire, supply of ammunition, &c., we may expect to be 
able to make use of this potential maximum rate of fire ? 
(Y.) The advantages and disadvantages, probable and alleged, ensuing 
from the adoption of a Q.F. field artillery with the characteristics and 
rates of fire previously determined. 
N.B.—In the following pages the terms “ Q.F. gun ” or “ Q.F. field 
gun ” include the mounting or carriage in both cases. When the gun 
alone is referred to it will be stated. 
(I.) Comparison of Q.F. guns for ships and forts with 
EXISTING FIELD GUNS. 
The rate of accurate aimed fire with the 12-pounder Q.F. of 12 cwt. 
using electric firing and percussion shell may be taken as about 10 
rounds per gun per minutef. 
The highest rate of “ section ” fire with ammunition ready prepared 
with our existing 12 and 15 pounder field equipments is two rounds per 
gun per minute and of “ battery ” fire, ammunition being prepared as 
required, one round per gun per minute. J 
From an examination of the drills, and a consideration of the nature 
of the service with the two forms of equipment above mentioned, and 
for the moment comparing only the rate of magazine fire with the field 
gun (when running up is not always necessary and laying is rough§), 
with the rate of the Q.F. gun, I am of opinion that the immense differ¬ 
ence in rapidity of fire with the two equipments is due to the following 
causes. 
* The most amazing rates are given, only in one instance less than 10 rounds per gun 
per minute (the Austro-Hungarian Q.F. gun for which 6 rounds per gun per minute is 
apparently claimed—see report in Times of October 8th, 1897), and sometimes as high as 
20 1 I On the other hand I have seen it argued in a French newspaper that the Germans, 
knowing that their field artillery equipment is inferior to that of the French, started a 
Q.F. re-armament and loudly proclaimed its advantages in order to compel the French 
to undertake an unnecessary re-armament and so lose the commanding position they 
would hold while Germany’s Artillery is deranged by a change which has become 
imperative. 
f The highest rate of which I have authentic information is five aimed rounds in 23£ 
seconds obtained from a 12-pounder Q.F. of 12 cwt. in H.M.S, “ Excellent.” 
X Obtained from Annual Reports of School of Gunnery. These rates are the absolute 
maxima and are rarely attained. 
§ Field Artillery Drill, 1896, page 114. 
