880 
SILVER MEDAL PRIZE ESSAY, 1893 . 
guns are intact and fire a maximum.” He founded this theory on the 
increased resistance of armour if struck aslant. 
Vice-Admiral Sir E. Fremantle agreed with him : The position of 
45 degrees .... was one which w r as especially favourable as 
enabling you to use all your guns on one broadside, whilst at the same 
time not being placed in a position normal to that of the enemy. - ” 
But Captain May, ft. U., replied with much force : “ How-a-days that 
we have so much curved armour, turrets, barbettes, redoubts, and the 
much abused conning tower, I do not think the oblique direction is so 
important. If a shell comes in on the bow, 45 degrees from the keel, 
and bursts, the splinters will diverge another 45 degrees, and will rake 
the deck, going nearly fore and aft, whereas if the shell comes in 
directly abeam, you only get your angle 45 degrees, and probably 
only one gun on the fighting side injured. I think that is important, 
and we cannot afford to disregard it.” 
Tables might be given to show the increase of resistance given by 
the variation of the angle of impact, and it may be conceded that in 
some ships an oblique position of the keel may cause the emplacements 
of the primary armament to afford considerable protection to the 
secondary armament; but with a properly arranged and a properly 
fought fortress, the ships will be dealt with in succession and assailed 
with a converging fire, which will defeat such a manoeuvre. 
Under this head, too, may be included the nature of the fire. 
Whether the fire of the fleet shall be concentrated on works in suc¬ 
cession or spread depends on their arrangement. If the batteries can 
be approached in succession. Sir Howard Douglas’ plan, as quoted by 
Captain Bridge, B-.N., 1 is obviously the best: “ Isolated points of 
defence mutually protecting each other should be attacked in detail, 
and successively reduced, after which the fleet may arrive at and 
attack the main position.” But if they do mutually protect each 
other, it is not clear how they can be approached in succession, and 
seeing how little material damage can be effected by ships’ fire, it 
would appear that it must be generally advisable to, as far as possible, 
engage all guns bearing on the ships, in order to lessen the accuracy 
of their fire. 
Under nearly all circumstances common shell appears to be the best 
projectile, but as exceptions may be noted— {a) The case of openworks, 
when the range is known and facilities for observing the fire are good, 
in which shrapnel with time fuzes having some searching power may 
be better; ( b ) and perhaps, the chilled iron forts to be found 2 on the 
French, German, Russian, Danish, Spanish and Portuguese coasts, 
which might be best dealt with by salvos of armour-piercing shot. 
But even against armoured casemates common shell will generally have 
the best effect, because the burst affects the personnel morally, the 
observation of fire is easier, and guns may be put out of action by 
their mountings being jammed by debris or pieces of shell. 
As a rule percussion fuzes to burst on graze are best, though if 
1 Naval Attack of a Fortress ; Bridge. E.E. Occasional Papers, 1877. 
2 Attack of Armour-clad Vessels Iby Artillery ; Orde Browne. R.TJ.S. Institution Journal. Vol* 
XXVI. 
