The Sun.
London, England, 1860-10-03 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,—The consideration of our present means of
naval attack and defence involves questions of press-
ing importance, and in the hope of rendering some
assistance in forming correct conclusions I offer a
few observations upon the subject.
While I agree with much that was contained in
the letter addressed to you by Captain Halsted, I
think that his opinions are based chiefly on those
trials at which he was present, when the armour
plates were successful in repelling cannon shot. As
I have only been present at trials where the pro-
jectiles have invariably penetrated the armour-
plates, I have arrived at a different general conclu-
sion.

Captain Halsted appears to have made a mis-
take in applying the results of the experiments
which he witnessed to others at which he was not
present. Having stated that at 400 yards the
Armstrong gun failed to make an impression on the
Trusty, he concludes that the Whitworth 80-
pounder would not succeed at a like range ; whereas
the fact is that in October, 1858, my 681 b. projec-
tile, fired from a distance of 450 yards, penetrated
through the 4-inch armour plate and the sides of the
Alfred and entered into the ship.
For a statement of what were really the results of
the trials of my 80-pounder against the Trusty in
May last I would refer to the account given in the
Times of May 28, written, I believe, by your " own
correspondent," who witnessed them.
The Carnation gunboat, from which the gun was
fired, was anchored at the short range of 200 yards,
because it was blowing " half a gale," and the roll-
ing of the boat rendered it difficult and unsafe to
take aim from a greater distance—unsafe for this
reason. It had been proved, by experiments made
on board the Excellent in December, 1857, that my
fiat-fronted projectiles passed through 30 feet of
water and still retained great penetrating power.
When I made a request to be allowed to fire at the
Trusty's armour plate below her water line my pro-
position was declinel, and it was not thought ad-
visable, considering the rough state of the weather,
to run the risk of the experiment being involun-
tarily tried by an accidental low shot of the gunner
who was one of the Excellent's best marksmen.

In Captain Halsted's letter he speaks of " only
three Whitworth shots taking effect" on the Trusty's
side. He omits mention of another shot which
struck a sound plate fixed over a porthole and
strengthened at the back with beams of solid timber
of such thickness and so firmly fastened with large
iron belts that it formed apparently the strongest
part of the ship's side. This shot "pierced through
the centre of a plate and into the main deck of the
ship, driving before it a mass of splinters and an
immense iron bolt, which, from the position in
which it was found among the fragments of wood
on the main deck, had evidently been dashed
through and whirled about with a force only infe-
rior to that of the projectile itself."—(Vide the
limes, May 28.)
Only five shots in all were fired from my gun on
the occasion referred to; of these one shot, owing
to the rolling of the gunboat, went over the Trusty;
four hit her sides, and every one of them went
through her plates. Two, which struck directly
"end on," entered into the ship; two, which struck
obliquely, after penetrating through the armour
plate, buried themselves in the ship's side. I will
not here dwell on what would have been the effect
had the rear end of these projectiles been made as
shells, which I certainly believe may be done with-
out destroying their penetrating power.
If it be asked why only five shots were fired from
my gun, the answer is simply that the experiments
were made at the request and in the presence of the
Lords of the Admiralty. They, with the First Lord
himself, went on board the Trusty, and personally
examined the effects of the shots. As all that hit the
plates went through them the results were consi-
dered conclusive, and more experiments being then
deemed unnecessary, they were ordered to be dis•
continued.

There is no doubt but that ships may be built
which are proof against ordinary shot, but my expe-
rience leads me to believe that the penetration of
armour plates is a question of firing against them a
projectile under the proper combined conditions;
these are, that it shall be of the proper shape, ma-
terial, and weight, and have the requisite velocity.
A flat-fronted projectile of properly hardened ma-
terial, and weighing less than an ounce, fired from
one of my ordinary rifles, will penetrate wrought-
iron plates 6.loths of an inch thick. Again, plates
4 inches thick are penetrated by the 801 b. projec-
tiles, and I have no doubt but that 6-inch plates
would be penetrated by heavier projectiles with a
more powerful gun. Increased thickness of plate,
then, is to be overcome by increased power of gun ;
and the question is, in which case will the capabi-
lity of increase sooner reach its limits ?
Ships which are hampered by the weight of enor-
mous plates are so overburdened that they are unfit
to carry a broadside of guns heavy enough to pene-
trate the armour of vessels plated similarly to them-
selves.
Again, a ship constructed to carry very thick
plates cannot be driven at the high speed which
must hereafter give the superiority in naval war-
fare.

remainsehtt nheactn
oiensiedaenrahtieosnt oefndcousrte.
the
is tirlueertehytaet the richest
drain of costly equipments, and therefore cheap
warfare would be a disadvantage; but it is also
true that naval casualties and mishaps must be cal-
culated upon, and it would be bad policy to concen-
trate too large an outlay upon a single vessel.
It will be for naval authorities to consider the
position in which the large heavily-plated yet still
vulnerable ship would be placed if attacked by
several smaller and far swifter vessels, each carry-
ing a few powerful guns, and able to choase its
distance for striking an enemy which presents so
large a target. What would be the result of firing
fiat-fronted shots at her plates below the, water
line, or of their concentrated fire directed upon the
axis of her screw—a mark that might be hit at a
considerable distance ?
The plan of warding cffshot by protecting armour
has been often resorted to, but the means of attack
have continually proved the vulnerability of the
armour and driven it out oflISe• It has to be shown
whether this will be the case with our ships of war,
and I fully concur in the opinion expressed in your
paper, that the best and speediest mode of arriving
at a right decision is to give full publicity to the
results of properly conducted experiments.
I remain, Sir, yours very obediently,
JOSEPH WHITWORTH.
Manchester, Sept. 28.