The Sun.
London, England, 1865-09-09 00:00:00

Her Majesty's Ship Minotaur.

The building of this frigate was contracted for
by the Admiralty with the Thames Ironworks Com-
pany. After very considerable delays in the pro-
gress- of the work the vessel was launched on the
12th of December, 1864, in the presence of the Ad-
miralty and some thousands of spectators. Subse-
quently to her launch the ship was fitted with the
greater portion of her armour plating, her five iron
masts, with their complicated rig, and received her
machinery from the firm of John Penn and Son.
All this completed, she left the Thames for Ports-
mouth, where she has since had certain alterations
made on her main deck for mounting, experimen-
tally, 12-ton guns, making good her general equip-
ment, and preparing her for the official trial of speed
at light draught of water over the measured mile,
whic commenced with full-boiler power in Stokes
Bay, near Portsmouth, yesterday.
The Minotaur has a length between perpendicu-
lars of 400 ft, an extreme breadth of 59ft 4in., a
depth in hold of 41ft 6in., and a Navy List tonnage
of 6,621. The ship is built up from a keelson formed
of a vast bar of iron 40in in depth. To this the
iron ribs are bolted in short lengths, to meet the
longitudinal girders, at intervals of 23in and 28in.
These ribs, meeting with and joining the longitu-
dinal girders, divide the bottom of the ship into a
number of square cells, braced and tied together in
the strongest possible manner. Above this lower
section of ribs there are five longitudinal girders,
which stretch along the whole length of the ship,
intersect the ribs, and give unyielding strength to
her frame. Thick, deep girders athwartships hold
and further strengthen the ship's sides, and on these
the respective decks are laid. The upper deck girders
or beams are covered with iron plating, riveted
together in the strongest boiler-make form, and on
this is laid the usual oak and teak plank forming
the upper surface of the deck. The height
from the ship's floor to the lower deck is 21ft., the
main deck being 9ft. 2in., and the upper deck 7ft.
2in.- in the clear from deck planking to lower part of
overhead beams. Running along each side of the
ship are the wing passages, 42in. wide, correspond-
ing with the height between decks, and divided into
a multitude of water-tight compartments. In the
lower portion are water-tight bulkheads for the ad-
mission of water ballast to increase the immersion
of the ship, if such a step, from lightness of immer-
sion by consumption of fuel and stores, should ever
be rendered expedient. Externally the hull of the
ship has a powerful beauty of its own, which we
think fully equivalent in gracefulness, and more
than equivalent in force, to the beautiful yacht-
like outline of the Warrior. The stern of the Mino-

taur is elliptic and without any quarter badges or
useless ornamentation, while the bows of the ship
preserve the same cutter-like form, free of all over-
hanging weight, the stemhead falling slightly in-
board from about 3ft. above the water-line. The
sides of the ship amidships have a slope inwards of
2ft. from the water-line, and this, added to the
gracefully curved lines of the bows and stern, gives
the ship a bold and handsome appearance, which it
becomes difficult to imagine could possibly be im-
proved upon in any future drawings of a broadside
gun ship. The rolled iron armour plating covering
the outer surface of the Minotaur's hull, where ex-
posed to shot, extends from the usual sft. distance
below the load water-line to the upper deck plank-
ing and waterways. It is 51in. in thickness on the
broadside, but gradually tapers off to 41in. round
the bows and the stern. This armour plating rests
on the iron framing, filled in with 9in. of teak
backing, with an inner iron skin on the teak to pre-
vent splinters starting out on the impact of shot,
and to hold up the backing of the armour-plate to
its work. The gunports arc at present of the usual

area and form given to all our -ironclads, with the
exception of four ports amidships--two on each side
of her main deck—which have been enlarged for
experimental practice with 12 ton guns.
It will be found, therefore, from the foregoing
account of the main characteristics of the Minotaur
that she differs from the Warrior in tonnage and
general dimensions ;in engine power, disposition of
her armour, thickness of armour, and thickness of
the armour teak backing. In tonnage the Minotaur
exceeds the Warrior by 51-2 tons ; in length by 20
feet, and in breadth by about 16 inches. In horse
power of engines she exceeds her by the somewhat
indefinitely expressed addition of 100-horse. In the
disposition of armour plating the Minotaur carries '
her plating round the bows and the stern as well as
on the broadside, while the Warrior has only about
220 feet of her main deck and water-line covered
with plating, her extreme ends being of thin iron
plating divided and subdivided into numerous cellu-
lar and water-tight compartments. The Minotaur
carries 51in. of armour on 9in. of teak backing
amidships, and 41in. of armour on the same descrip-
tion of backing round her bow and stern. The
Warrior's armour, which she carries, as we have
said, only on her broadsides, is tin. less in thickness
than the armour of the Minotaur, but it is supported
by double the thickness of the teak backing possessed
by her improved sister—i.e., 18in.
The most important differences existing, there-
fore, between the Minotaur and Warrior lie in the
disposition of the armour of each, and the thickness
of the armour considered specially and closely in
conjunction with the thickness of the teak backing.
In the protected ends of the ship the Minotaur is
undoubtedly a superior vessel to the Warrior. In
the increase of the armour from 4in. to siin.,
and the decrease of the teak backing from
18in. to 9in., the reverse position has undoubtedly
been arrived at. To ascertain the exact compara-
tive value of the resisting force to shot and shell by
the sides of the two ships, we must turn for a mo-

ment to the practice-ground at Shoebury, where we
may also supplement our proposed comparison by
pursuing it further with Mr. Reed's Bellerophon
and Hercules. It is well known to all readers of
The Sun that targets to represent a section of the
broadside of each of our ironclads, from the War-
rior downwards, have been built to Admiralty order,
and tested under fire at Shoeburyness. The War-
rior target gained wonderful fame by the power of
resisting shot or shell plied against it from guns of
various calibres, and literally came unscathed out of
a fire which " crumpled up " the Minotaur target.
This result seemed to prove that the increase of the
iron plating and the decrease of the teak backing of
the Minotaur gave a shot-resisting power on the
brOadside very inferior to that of the Warrior.
These anomalies in the construction of our iron
ships of war did not escape the notice of our present
Chief Naval Constructor, who increased the weight
of his side in the Bellerophon over that of the War-
rior or the Minotaur, and made a still further ad-
vance in the same direction in his designs for the
Hercules. The weight of the Warrior target was
about 3351 b. per square foot of ship's side, and the
Minotaur's 3471 b., an increase of weight with a
decrease of shot resisting power. Mr. Reed made
the weight of his Bellerophon target to represent the
ship's side at 3891 b. per square foot. In the
Hercules target, with its double skin, double fram-
ing, and double beams between, the weight per
square foot was increased by Mr. Reed to no less
than 5201 b per square foot. The targets of the Wa-
rrior, Minotaur, and Bellerophon were all beaten by
the guns at Shoebury, but the Hercules target was
e eGO
not beaten ; a 300-pounder gun firing a shot (steel)
we it
e).
t on lb
thef
innerpowder,
s k inf
failing
tb to produce
aprrgoedtu a ann slightly other
se
bulging it inwards.
allotted The difference in the defensi
uleeisghisit simplyo f
this
tle rowersformer of the
r r Minotauradse
r and ire
w
armour
over every part of her hull, from her upper deck
planking to Oft. below her load water-line, while
the Hercules' armour is concentrated in a central
square battery and a water-line belt.

Yesterday the ship did not exhibit to advantage
her noble proportions inboard, the decks being
crowded with tanks, chain cables, and stores of all
kinds waiting stowage below. The strength with
which the ship has been constructed and the beauti-
ful finish of the workmanship in every part was the