Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-07-01
AS TO COAST DEFENSES.
Some Ideas on the Subject by Rear Admiral
Ammen.
He Discusses the Criticisms Made on His
Vessel, the kafahdin, and Talks Upon
Rams and Their Utility.
Written for The Evening Star.

first idea was that armored torpedo boats would
be found most available a principal naval
arm and most economical. with this proviso.
that nothing is economical that will not best
fulfill the intended object
Tentative calculations soon convinced me
that however well planned to secure great
speed and at the same time maximum protec-
ton with a minimum of armor, that the
| requisite weight to secure reasonable immun-
ity from the projectiles of an enemy would
make the construction by no means indifferent
as a ram. A recent occurrence, published,
Of torpedo boat No. IS of the British navy
running into the battle ship Nile and causing
her forward compartment to ill with water.
has verified the fact that an enormous weight
is not necessary to destroy by rampcing
vessel OF whatever displacement. The
weight OF the ram is one factor,
the other is the square of the velocity when
she strikes, therefore a relatively light weight
with high velocity will do the work. The
| torpedo boat alluded to is supposed to have had
a weight Of only thirty-eight tous; her velocity
must have been great; we may suppose twenty
should do such great destruction was q revela-
tion to me. A torpedo boat or . ram Of only
$50 tons, with the same speed. would have ten
times the energy to deliver over to her victim.
Then with only ten knots speed instead OF
twenty the measure of her energy would be
one-fourth Of the twenty-knot speed.
NO MEAN ApvEEsARY.
So We see that construction Of only 1000
tons displacement built on the best lines for
speed. and modelled above the water line to give
the best results rs to a minimum weight of ar
favoring q DETECTION of projectiles thrown at
her, would be no mean adversary for q battle
ship, and that feet of them would be dreaded
by most navy men more than an encounter
with equal number OF battle
ships. bearing in mind that the rams
ships at early dawn, or under whatever condi-
tions would most favor the attack. when the
battle ships could use their guns to the least
| advantage. 1t does not follow that the dis
placement of the rams should be 10 small. nor
is 1t a consequent that we should have no bat
tie ships, but would say that the battle ships
hereafter built could be adyantageously modi-
fed in design.
] read in the Post of June 26 as follows:
''One result Of the catastrophe has been to
bring to the front numerous advocates OF the
ram, pure and simple. as a weapon OF offense and
attention has been called anew to a paper
prepared on the subject by Admiral Ammen.
the designer Of a unique vessel OF this type
called the Katahdiu. now being built Mt Bath
Me-, for the navy. But the naval constructors
do not attach much importance to this vessel,
mainly because Of the fact that by reason Of
the weight Of her armor she will be
too slow to catch up with most Of the
modern war vessels. They argue that most Of
the American naval vessels have ram bows. and
would be quite efficient a specially de-
signed ram They also say that the efficiency
OF the ram may be easily overestimated. for
actual experience in warfare has proven that it
IL exceedingly difficult. aud in most cases i'm
possible. to ram an antagonist that is fully
aware of the purpose of the enemy. for the
attack can generally be defeated by sharp
maneuvering. while the vessel making the at
tempt must expose herself Mt her most vulner-
able point to an almost irresistible concentrated
fire OF heavy guns"
DISCUSSING TIE CRITICISMS.
/ will discuss these criticisms in the order
presented. The calculations for speed by til e
bureau Of construction and by two experts
speed as any vessel in our navy Of the tame
displacement and the same indicated horse
power. We may hope that the speed Of the
vessel will soon be tried: also her facility for
turning, which will probably greatly exceed
that of any vessel in our navy of the same
length.
A description Of the Katahdin in lie Yacht
of March I. translated ard published in Sea-
board OF Nav 4. presents a much more favor
able view of the ram, and does not sustain the
idea that . feet Of battle ships could execute
sharp maneuvers and avoid being rammed by q
feet Of rams Besides. as before stated, the
attack should be made when the rams found
the opportunity favorable.
In relation to ram bows on our naval vessels.
I quote from The Old Navy and the New "A
critic Of the ram proposed by mo said that all
battle ships bad ram bows; be might as well
have said that all men who carry swords are 70
be considered equally effective in their use,
when the sword Is the weapon to decide the
contest
The ram bow of the lIerrimac was knocked
OF in ramming the Congress and caused her to
leak so badly that she had to be put into dock
and repaired. more pronounced ram bow in
the British navy Of the style OF the ram Stone
wall ran into collier about the close of our
civi. war and went down at once.
In the appendix OF the report Of the Secre-
tary of the Navy Of 1883 will be found a letter
by me on coast defense; on pages 40 474 Of
The Old Navy and the New will be found a
discussion rams.
The translation in Seaboard Of May may
serve to enlighten some naval constructors. to
whom would cite the significant fact that two
Of our yacht ''cup defenders" the Pilgrim and
the Jubilee, seem to have curved lines Of keel
quite like the ram, which seem to offer greater
facility for turning than vessels Of war with
ram bows. 1t is found unhappily through
many collisions Of vessels that ram bows are not
an essential nor, in NV belief, advantageous In
destroying vessel. ana may prove q serious
injury, a. was the case with the Merrimac, and
II may possibly be shown when the Camper
down Is docked.
CONSTRUCTION NIxoN's ERRORS.
In the New York Herald Of the 9th Mr.
Lewis Nixon, naval constructor of the Cramps.
Is quoted IN relation to the sinking Of the
Victoria:
''Now, in regard to rams 1t does not follow
because the Victoria has been sunk that all that
10 necessary for US to have in order to resist
foreign battle ships 10 . number of rams Al
though the Victoria Was sunk by . ram you
must understand that It was o battle ship that
carried that ram. The efficiency Of a ram de-
ponds probably more upon her momentum
than upon anything else. The Ammen ram.
for instance. to have the same momentum that
the Camperdown had When she struck the VIC
toria would have to have been going fftv knots
an hour, because these rams are only 2 200 tons,
while the battle ship is 10, 900 TONS
1t will be accepted as fact that the eff
cheney OF q ram depends upon her momentum
We're the Ammen ram with O weight OF 1000
tons in round numbers, which is one-fifth of
tho weight Of the Canperdown, to strike YES
sci under similar conditions and with the same
speed. she would have one-fifth Of the momen-
tum or energy Of the battle ship. Ii We as-
sumo the battle ship had a speed Of ten knots
and the Ammen ram had q speed OF fifty
knots the relative weights Of the vessels
do not bear out Mr. Nixon's as
sertion. The form ula is brief: Weight Of Cam
perdown, 0.000 tons: square Of 10 knots speed
100, which, multiplied by the weight Of the