THE ROYAL ARTILLERY INSTITUTION. 
217 
Pettman's naval fuse was used with tlie &? f shell, and the pillar fuze with 
the Armstrong shell. 
Until the 16th September 1862, it was generally believed that iron 
plated ships of war were safe from the penetration of shells, and to 
Mr Whitworth undoubtedly belongs the credit of exposing the fallacy of 
this belief. 
M. Xavier Eaymond,—by no means a prejudiced witness in favour of 
English inventions,—in his book “ Les Marines de la Erance et de 
l'Angleterre,” in speaking of Mr Whitworth, says:— 
“ Nous n’avons rien a lui envier, rien que la priorite qui, par l’indolence, nous 
lui avons laisse prendre pour le tir des projectiles creux centre les plaques des 
cuirasses.nous aurions mauvaise grace a ne pas convenir, que nous devons 
regretter d’avoir laisse prendre a d’autres une priorite quelconque, meme sur un 
detail si petit qu’il soifc. ” 
And further on in alluding to improvements which have been made in 
artillery by French officers, M. Eaymond says:— 
“ Ce n’est pas sans un certain depit, je le confesse, que j’ai vu M. Whitworth les 
devancer pour le tir des boulets creux contre les cuirasses. ” 
So here we have satisfactory evidence that in this all important matter of 
steel shells, an Englishman has led the way; and although M. Xavier 
Eaymond considers it merely,— 
“ Un detail si petit qui’il soit 
this is not the opinion in this country, for the Special Committee on Iron in 
their last Eeport state,— 
“ It must, however, he borne in mind that hy far the most damaging projectiles for 
use against armour-plated vessels are steel shells. 55 
One peculiarity of these shells is that no fuze is used with them; the 
reason for the explosion of the bursting charge is thus given by Lieut. 
Noble, E.A., in his Eeport on Ballistic Experiments:— 
“ Upon the explosion of the charge in firing, the bursting charge is c set up 5 
in the interior of the shell, and becomes a hard compact cake; its volume is reduced 
by about one-third, and consequently there is an empty space left in the inside of the 
shell. Upon impact, this compressed powder is driven with enormous force, 
into this empty space, and receives a violent blow or shock against the iron; 
sufficient heat is developed by this blow and the friction against the inside to 
explode the charge. 5 ’ 
An unexploded steel 300-pr. shell which was fired at Shoeburyness in 
December 1863, was found to contain II lbs. of powder (out of 15 lbs.) in 
a very compressed and hard condition, and which only occupied a depth of 
8£ inches. 
Mr Whitworth's steel shell and Sir W. Armstrong's 
differ considerably. The former are solid at the head, 
and open at the rear to receive the bursting charge, 
which is contained in a flannel bag, and the rear of the 
shell is closed by a steel cup which screws into the end 
of the shell. Fig. 14 shows a 12-pr. shell with the cup 
screwed in. 
The Armstrong shell is open in front, and the bursting 
charge is “ stemmed'' in the shells by using a wooden 
