514 
GOLD MEDAL PRIZE ESSAY, 1879 . 
Sith P re ed We see > ^hen, that the proposed gun has at 4000 yds. a velocity not 
sent i6-pr. practically differing from that of the present 16-pr. at 2000 yds. We 
thus get a very flat trajectory up to 3000 yds., which, however powerful 
the gun may be, will in general be the limit of range for artillery, as 
beyond it is only under exceptional circumstances of weather, position, 
&c., that we can see what we are doing. The angle of descent at 
3000 yds. would be about 7°. This means a fall of about 1 ft. in 8; or 
6 ft.—the height of a man—would be covered for 16 yds. before graze. 
The velocity, too, is still high (928 f.s.) Under the same circumstances 
the 16-pr. has an angle of descent of about 1 ft. in 5, and consequently 
an object 6 ft. high only covers 10 yds. of ground. 
In other words, supposing the guns to shoot equally well, at 3000 yds. 
the chances of striking an object of given height are nearly 8 to 5 in 
favour of the 24-pr. A glance at the comparative diagram of shrapnel 
at 2000 yds. shows that when the shell is burst at 1900 yds., or 100 yds. 
short of the target, the furthest bullet only ranges 225 yds. from burst 
to graze in the case of the 16-pr., while it ranges no less than 340 yds. 
in the case of the 24-pr. The 24-lb. shell is only 20 ft. above the 
ground at burst; the lowest bullet would strike the ground about 
43 yds. nearer the target, with an angle of descent of 11° 20', about. 
The 16-pr. shell is 32*5 ft. off the ground when it explodes; its lowest 
bullet strikes 42 yds. short of the target, 58 from burst, and has an 
angle of descent of about 14°. 
These considerations show what very great advantages are to be 
obtained from flatness of trajectory. We shall consider more in detail 
the advantages of the proposed gun in shrapnel fire under the head of 
Ammunition. 
Special 
points to be 
observed 
for the 
future. 
20. What, then, do we advocate as the especial points necessary to 
be observed in constructing the field guns of the future ? We think as 
follows :— 
(1) They must not exceed the present guns in weight. 
(2) We must go further than we have done at present in reducing 
the calibre compared with the weight of the shell; that is to say, 
retaining our present calibres, or nearly so, we should be prepared to 
make the shells much heavier. Increased capacity will follow from 
increased length; advantage being taken of improvement in the 
material employed to retain sufficient strength to stand the increased 
setting-up strain due to greater length. 
(3) The present muzzle velocities must be largely increased, in order 
to gain power at close range and that flatness of trajectory which 
experience proves to be so essential. Attending closely to the principle 
of small calibre enunciated above, we are enabled to use these high 
velocities without great waste of power; that is to say, that as we 
reduce the calibre compared with that of the shell, so does it become 
more advantageous to fire shells with high velocities. This the follow¬ 
ing table shows ;—- 
