476 
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF 
range, its velocity is of course very low, and therefore the disadvantage 
to the flat head cannot be so apparent. But since neither projectile 
would be effective against armour-plates with such low velocity, it 
follows that this part of its flight should not be included in the calcu¬ 
lation. The flat head is really at great disadvantage from its greater 
loss of velocity when moving at any effective speed. 
Besides official experience, we have the record of some private 
experiments of Sir J. Whitworth, of which an account was read before 
the British Association at Exeter, in August, 1869. They were made 
with a gun of only 1’85 inches calibre against plates from 1J to 2 inches 
thick. The conclusions are directly opposed to those to which all 
official trials have pointed, and this disagreement remains to be 
accounted for; but in estimating the values of the opposed conclusions, 
it must be remembered that the official results were obtained with real 
guns of 5J-inch and 7-inch calibre firing against real armour-plates, 
both backed and unbacked, and not, as in the case of Sir J. Whitworth, 
with a toy gun of 1 *85 inch bore. 
Besides, his experiments seem to have been wanting in philosophical 
method. Sir Joseph fell into the error of mixing up the two questions 
of material and form of head, which might easily and should certainly 
have been kept distinct, especially in the case of such a small gun as he 
was using. 
This is far from being a solitary instance of want of perspicuousness 
in Sir J. Whitworth's method of experiment ; and the liability to errors 
of this nature ought to throw some doubt on private tests and trials 
carried out by inventors themselves, and through their own dependents. 
In fact, it would certainly seem that artillerists, however able, have 
more to gain than to lose by perfect openness, both as regards their 
views and the experiments upon which those views are based. 
That artillerists of great distinction may blunder, is clear. 
Sir Joseph himself once entertained the idea, and possibly continues 
to do so, that the “ initial velocity of a spherical shot from a smooth- 
bored gun, would not be as great as from a spherical shot from a 
rifled gun." (See “ Ordnance Blue-Book " of 1868, p. 102, question 
2350.) 
He learned from official records that the initial velocity of the service 
12-pr. round shot was about 1900 feet per second ; he therefore proposed 
to the Director of Ordnance to fire a sphere from his own 12-pr. rifled 
gun, which was accordingly done, and the unprecedented velocity of 
2200 feet per second was obtained. He was thereupon satisfied that the 
increase of 300 feet was due to the rifling alone (see “ Blue-Book," p. 106, 
questions 2460-61). It is needless to say that this conclusion should 
never have been accepted for a moment. Upon such premises one 
might shew that, since a rifle-twist of one turn in twenty calibres gave 
an increase of velocity of 300 feet per second,.a twist of one turn in every 
calibre would give a much greater increase, and that with such simple 
means at our command of increasing velocity, powder might be econo¬ 
mised, and we should ultimately arrive at a gun which would require 
no powder at all, but would “ go off" by sheer twist of rifling alone. 
The facts are, that the shot whose velocity was assumed to be 1900 feet 
