From: phs172m@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au (Stephen Harker)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.china,soc.history
Subject: <None>
Date: 2 Sep 92 09:04:39 +1000
Organization: Physics Department, Monash University, Australia

In article <1992Sep1.145046.5533@news2.cis.umn.edu>, thornley@nano.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley) writes:
> In article <ROTEN.92Aug31133031@CUBA.gsfc.nasa.gov> roten@CUBA.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Roten) writes:
>>In article <jwb.715225686@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au> 
>>jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) writes:
>>
>>>miklg@acuson.com (Michael Goldman ) writes:
>>
>[ Some information removed ] 
>>>>       By the end
>>>>	of the US Civil War the US had the best Army and largest Navy in the
>>>>	world, and at any time after that could have carved out whatever
>>>>	piece of China she had a desire for.  
>>
>>>[U.S. Army in 1865 was large and battle-hardened, but was run down within
>>> a decade.  At no time did the combined Union and Confederate fleets
>>> match even the French navy, not the British.]
>>>In technology, it lagged behind both Britain and Germany in the 
>>>"Dreadnaught" revolution in naval architecture of the early 1900s.  
>>
> Actually, the first dreadnaught battleships laid down were American.
> They were in some respects ahead of their time, having all guns on the
> centerline in superfiring turrets.  I'd say it was about this time that
> the U.S. started taking the lead in warship design.

	Yes and no :-).  They were still well behind in propulsion
techniques at the time - the power from turbines was a big factor in
Dreadnought's effectiveness - also there were reasons why the British
(incorrectly) rejected superfiring in their design for Dreadnought.  The
big advance came with the introduction of "all or nothing" armouring in
1914 in my view, although they still had weak deck armour it made these
ships better protected than others.  The other notable factor was the use
of magazines below shell rooms also in 1914 from memory.  The British did
not come to either of those until after Jutland, and a series of
experiments in magazine locations during WW1.  The Germans may never have
done the latter  as diagrams I have seen of Bismarck show she had magazines
above shell rooms!

>>I'm glad you flamed him about this, Jim, because if you hadn't, I would 
>>have.  There is only one significant naval innovation the U. S. made 
>>before 1900, the ironclad.  And that was _immediately_ copied.  
>>
> I hope you'll consider this as a friendly correction, but didn't the
> British and French pioneer ironclads?  The Monitor was, I believe, the
> first "modern" warship designed with absolutely no provision for sails,
> but was thoroughly impractical for oceanic operations.  In any case,
> within ten years after the Civil War, the U.S. Navy was hopelessly
> antiquated.

	Yes, the French with Gloire and British with HMS Warrior (25 
December 1860).  I don't have dates for Gloire, however HMS Warrior was
laid down in response to Gloire though this does not mean she was launched
later.  There was an article on HMS Warrior in Scientific American,
December 1987, from memory I think they quote HMS Warrior as achieving 13
knots by sail, 14 knots by steam and 17.5 knots with both!

-- 
Stephen Harker			phs172m@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Monash University		Baloney baffles brains: Eric Frank Russell