THE ROYAL ARTILLERY INSTITUTION. 
445 
turret having at all times a distinct view of his object, which, in a sea-way, would 
be frequently lost sight of by the captain of a broadside gun; and, further, the 
object is less liable to be interrupted by smoke. 
(( (b) There is better protection for the men fighting the gun who are actually 
inside the armour-plated part of the turret, and also for the gun and carriage, in the 
turret system than in the broadside. 
“ (c) We believe that a turret, with 6-inch armour plating, would be almost 
invulnerable as regards penetration, against any guns of less weight than 12 tons. 
“ (d) A ship armed with two turrets has the advantage of being able to direct all 
her guns on the same object on more bearings than by any other known plan; and 
of throwing a heavier weight of metal on either broadside than can be done by any 
armour-plated vessel of equal size and tonnage armed in any other mode now afloat, 
or that has yet been designed, so far as we are aware of. 
“ (e) Of two vessels of the same speed, one armed on the broadside and the other 
armed with two turrets, the latter has a greater facility of placing herself to an 
advantage in action, by keeping head to sea in a sea-way than the broadside ship. 
c< (f) If the ship were totally dismasted and the crew disabled, a one-turret ship 
would probably, and a two-turret ship certainly, be able to continue the action to 
greater advantage than a ship armed on any other plan under the like circum¬ 
stances. 
“ (g) When a ship has to go through an intricate channel, or up a winding river, 
when the enemy is always in range, the turret system would give a greater 
facilitv to a one-turret ship probably, and a two-turret ship certainly, of keeping her 
guns bearing on the enemy, while the ship would be following the course of the 
channel or stream.’* 
Admiral Golborough, in a report dated 26th February 1864, on Iron-Clads, 
to the Secretary U.S. Navy, states:— 
“ A difference of opinion also exists among naval minds, both at home and 
abroad, as to whether the better expedient is to use the guns of an iron-clad 
turretwise, or in broadside ports, under a covering plated deck. For my own part I 
have little doubt on the subject, particularly if the vessel herself be confined, as in 
my judgment she ought to be, to moderate dimensions; to such in effect as, with a 
high velocity, will offer sufficient momentum, used as a ram, to crush effectually any 
antagonist whatever, capable of sea service; and more than this, to my apprehension, 
is obviously worse than superfluous. The turret I regard as decidedly preferable, 
and mainly for these reasons ; it renders one gun of a class equivalent to at least two 
of the rams disposed in opposite broadside ports, and this with a great reduction of 
crew. It admits the use of much heavier guns. It does not necessarily involve a 
breadth of beam antagonistic to velocity. It affords a better protection to guns 
and men, and withal it secures the fighting of guns longer in a sea-way.” 
