112 
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OP 
Page 196.-—Here mention is 
Prom this extract, it would appear 
that another 13-inch gun, besides 
that referred to in Captain von 
DoppelmaiPs second extract, had 
burst. This, however, is the same 
gun (No 300)—an experimental 
13-inch bore in 23 tons of metal, 
and with an untempered steel tube. 
It is the gun about which Captain 
von Doppelmair had already made 
the curious blunder of stating that 
the charges used besides the service charges were all “ smaller” than 70lbs. 
and 60 lbs.; whereas, in fact, they were all, as we have seen, and as Captain 
von DoppelmaiPs own extract now informs us, exceptionally heavy charges 
—all heavier than 70 lbs., and nine of them of 100 lbs. each. 
made of the bursting of a 13-inch 
gun. The number of rounds is not 
stated, but it is mentioned that the 
gun was fired with very heavy charges, 
and that, among others, nine rounds 
were fired with 45*1 kilos. (99*43 lbs.) 
of powder.” 1 
This failure was due, again, to an 
original defect in that portion of the 
gun which is made of the material 
which Captain von Doppelmair 
especially favours, viz. steel. The 
proof of guns is established specially 
to bring to light any such defects, 
and to prevent untrustworthy guns 
from passing into the service. 
The proof, therefore, in this instance exactly answered the object for which 
it was established; and it is not necessarily a reproach to a system when a 
gun fails at proof. 3 The reproach attaches when a gun fails after proof— 
after admission into the service. The failure in question proved two things: 
It afforded a further and striking indication of the capricious character of 
even the best steel; and it showed that even an English gun, with a split 
steel tube, would not stand j^ 00 / charges. The result of this experience has 
been the introduction of a slight modification in the construction, by which 
the quantity of steel is reduced, the thickness of the steel tubes having been 
diminished; while the single outer iron coil has been divided into a double coil. 4 
With regard to Captain von DoppelmaiHs statement that of four 13-inch 
English guns “ three burst,” 5 it will be sufficient to observe that not one of 
these guns burst. They became unserviceable. The whole of these guns 
were of an experimental construction, with wrought-iron tubes, or tubes of 
untempered steel. 
4th. Not content with making a number of statements with regard to the 
English guns more or less specific, but all, as we have seen, more or less 
inexact. Captain von Doppelmair seeks to strengthen his case by a sort of 
wholesale condemnation of the English system of gun-building which hardly 
admits of categorical reply. He states that English guns “are not guns 
with scientific arrangement of metal; the arrangement may be there, but it 
Captain von Doppelmair, in a note, 
and in an appendix, gives some par¬ 
ticulars of the bursting, in September 
1868, of an English 9-inch Wool¬ 
wich gun. 2 
1 Doppelmair, p. 76. 2 Ibid. p. 77 note, and pp. 81-84. 
3 Sir Thomas Blomefield burst no less than 496 cast-iron guns in proof in one year, 1780-81, 
(See General Lefroy’s Catalogue of Museum of Artillery). 
4 “Changes in Artillery Materiel, &c,” §§ 1905, 1906. 
5 Doppelmair, p. 74. 
