SILVER MEDAL PRIZE ESSAY., 1879 . 
565 
Nation. 
Nature of gun. 
Weight of 
com. shell. 
Muzzle 
velocity. 
lbs. 
f.s. 
( 
R.M.L. 16-pr. 
16-2 
1355 
England... ■< 
n 9 » of 8 cwt. 
9-06 
1381 
« 9 w of 6 cwt. 
9-06 
1391 
Austria .. | 
R.B.L. 16-pr. 
„ 10 „ 
16-1 
9*5 
1480 
1395 
r 
R.B.L. Refive, 16-pr. 
15-4 
1280 
France...... ■< 
n « 11 n 
i, Lahitolle 17|// 
10-6 
17-6 
1463 
1558 
t 
n •// 13 n 
13*2 
1558 
Germany | 
R.B.L. Krupp, 15-pr. 
n n 11 a 
| 
15-4 
11*2 
1456 
1525 
Russia.£ 
R.B.L. 24-pr. 
a 13 n 
24-0 
12*6 
1060 
1004 
The Russian guns can scarcely be compared with the English, having 
much heavier projectiles for weight of metal; they are a different class 
of gun. The new guns now being introduced in Russia have much 
higher muzzle velocities. 
In France, the Reffye guns are being superseded by those of the 
Lahitolle system. 
We see from this table that our guns have lower velocities than those 
of France, Germany, and Austria, and that the Russian guns are alone 
inferior in this respect; these latter, however, are now being changed. 
As one of the advantages of M.L. guns is supposed to be their 
stronger construction, it is rather surprising to find that our guns do 
not throw heavier shells for equal weights of metal, as will be seen 
at a glance from the following table :—■ 
Nation. 
Gun. 
Weight of 
gun. 
Common shell. 
Shrapnel. 
cwt. 
lbs. 
lbs. 
England. 
16-pr. 
12-0 
16*2 (nearly) 
17’3 (nearly) 
Austria . 
16 * 
9-8 
16-1 
15-4 
France . | 
15 „ 
17 ** 
12-6 
10-43 
15'4 
17-6 
17-3 
17-6 
Germany . 
15 u 
9-0 
15*4 
18 
Russia. 
24 // 
12-2 
24 
30 
Judging from this table and the last, we may conclude that the 
English M.L. system requires rather greater weight of metal to throw 
a shell of equal weight, and that then the muzzle velocity obtained is 
less, as compared with French, German, and Austrian guns. This 
