User:Toddy1/Sandbox 8
 HMS Anson (circa 1897)
| |
| Class overview | |
|---|---|
| Name | Admiral class |
| Operators |  Royal Navy |
| Preceded by | Colossus class |
| Succeeded by | Victoria class |
| In commission | 1888–1910 |
| Completed | 6 |
| General characteristics Anson and Camperdown except where stated[1] | |
| Displacement | 10,600 long tons (10,800 t) |
| Length | 330 ft (101 m) |
| Beam | 68 ft 6 in (21 m) |
| Draught | 27 ft 10 in (8 m) |
| Propulsion | |
| Speed | |
| Complement | 530 |
| Armament |
|
| Armour |
|
The British Royal Navy's pre-dreadnought Admiral-class battleships of the 1880s followed the pattern of the Devastation class in having the main armament on centre-line mounts with the superstructure in between. This pattern was followed by most following British designs until HMS Dreadnought in 1906. They were known as the Admiral-class because they were all named after British admirals, such as Admiral George Anson.
The reasons for choosing the design
[edit]"In the Admiral class… the governing conditions were as follows: First, definite limits of cost had to be conformed to; secondly, provision had to be made for certain qualities of speed, armament and protection, which it was considered would make the Admirals more than a match for contemporary vessels in the French and other foreign navies."[4]
Building programme
[edit]| Ship | Built by | Engines by | Laid Down | Launched | Completed | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collingwood [5] | Pembroke | Humphrys | 12 July 1880 | 22 November 1882 | 1 July 1887 | |
| Anson [6] | Pembroke | Humphrys | 24 April 1883 | 17 February 1886 | May 1889 | |
| Camperdown [6] | Portsmouth | Maudslay | 18 December 1882 | 24 November 1885 | June 1889 | |
| Howe [6] | Pembroke | Humphrys | 7 June 1882 | 28 April 1885 | July 1889 | |
| Rodney [6] | Chatham | Humphrys | 6 February 1882 | 8 October 1884 | June 1888 | |
| Benbow [7] | Thames Ironworks | Maudslay | 1 November 1882 | 15 June 1885 | June 1888 |
Description
[edit]Armour
[edit]The preceding 1st-class battleships of the Inflexible, Ajax and Colossus classes were central-citadel turret-ships, with their turrets arranged en echelon; Brazil, China, Italy, and the USA also acquired en echelon battleships. In the Colossus, the citadel was 123 feet (37 m) long; the turrets were 80 feet (24 m) apart; the guns were 12 feet (3.7 m) above the waterline.[8] Outside the citadel, buoyancy was protected by an underwater armoured deck, and by a combination of subdivision, cork, and careful placement of coal bunkers.
The Admiral-class still retained the vestiges of a citadel; in the Collingwood, Howe and Rodney the belt was 140 feet (43 m) long;[8] this was increased to 150 feet (46 m) long in the Anson, Camperdown and Benbow.
The main guns were 22 feet (6.7 m) above the water, in two barbettes 140 feet (43 m) apart.[8] "The introduction of barbettes... when first proposed, led to much discussion. It was considered that the additional weight required for the armoured citadel, which is indespensable for the protection of the base of the turret, could be better used in increasing the speed and coal endurance, and in mounting a greater number of heavy and auxiliary guns. Turret-guns cannot be mounted as high above the water as guns en barbette."[9] "Various plans were proposed for enclosed turrets. The additional expense involed ranged from £40,000 to £100,000... The improvements anticipated did not appear to be sufficient to justify the loss of time and the heavy outlay."[9]
"Between the barbettes and above the true upper deck, is a large unarmoured battery, protected by 1-inch [25mm] steel plating from the fire of machine guns, and containing six 6-inch breech-loading guns, fought from ports 14 ft [4.3m] above the water. The battery is protected from raking fire by winged bulkheads plated with 6 in [150mm] of steel-faced armour. In this respect the Collingoood's battery resembles the batteries of the Nelson, Northampton, and Shannon. The crew will be berthed in the upper battery, and will have accommodation infinitely superior to that of any turret ship. The deck above the upper battery affords ample space for the stowage of boats and for working the ship."[8]
The Admirals' barbettes were placed "high above the true armoured hulls, with only armoured ammunition tubes connecting them with the belt deck – there were great risks of serious damage and derangement in consequence of the introduction of high-explosives and of larger quick-firing guns." .[10]
Brassey's Naval Annual compared the weights of "armour, including deck armour" of the Admiral-class with recent armoured ships:[9]
- 2,223 long tons (2,259 t) HMS Ajax
- 2,364 long tons (2,402 t) HMS Colossus
- 2,458 long tons (2,497 t) HMS Collingwood
Engines and boilers
[edit]
The Anson was "fitted with twin-screw vertical compound engines of 9,500 indicated horse-power by Messrs Humprhys, Tennant & Co. In design they are similar to the engines supplied by the same firm to the Howe, Rodney, and Collingwood, belonging to the same class of battle-ships. Each set of engines has one high-pressure cylinder, 52 in [130 cm] in diameter, placed between two low-pressure cylinders, 74 in [190 cm] in diameter, the stroke being 3 ft 9 in [114 cm]. The surface condensers contain an ample amount of cooling surface. The air-pumps are worked direct off the low-pressure cylinders."[11] The frames for carrying the crank-shafts "were bolted on to the box-girders, which are built into and form part of the structure of the hull. This... saves a great deal of weight."[11]
The Anson used steam at 100 psi (689.5 kPa). Steam was generated in eight four-furnace boilers, made of Siemens-Martin steel. They were fitted with 3408 tubes, 2.75 inches (7.0 cm) in diameter and 7 feet (210 cm) long and possessed a collective area of firegrate of 756 square feet (70.2 m2). The boilers were in four separate stokeholds, each of which had their own donkey pumps, etc. under the control of the stokehold staff. The forced draught fans were in accessible positions and driven by Brotherhood small three-cylinder engines.[11]
| Ship | Displacement | Engine power on trials (natural draught) |
Engine power on trials (forced draught) |
Boiler pressure | Length | Beam | Draught of water extreme |
Citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collingwood | 9,500 long tons (9,700 t) | 8,099.84 ihp (6,040 kW) | 9,573.0 ihp (7,140 kW) | 90 psi (620.5 kPa) | 325 ft 0 in (99.1 m) | 68 ft 0 in (20.7 m) | 26 ft 10 in (8.2 m) | [12][13] |
| Anson | 10,600 long tons (10,800 t) | 8,319.12 ihp (6,200 kW) | 12,567.78 ihp (9,370 kW) | 100 psi (689.5 kPa) | 330 ft 0 in (100.6 m) | 68 ft 6 in (20.9 m) | 27 ft 3 in (8.3 m) | [12][13] |
| Camperdown | 10,600 long tons (10,800 t) | 8,605.96 ihp (6,420 kW) | 11,740.88 ihp (8,760 kW) | 90 psi (620.5 kPa) | 330 ft 0 in (100.6 m) | 68 ft 6 in (20.9 m) | 27 ft 3 in (8.3 m) | [12][13] |
| Howe | 10,300 long tons (10,500 t) | 7,733.42 ihp (5,770 kW) | 11,728.8 ihp (8,750 kW) | 90 psi (620.5 kPa) | 325 ft 0 in (99.1 m) | 68 ft 0 in (20.7 m) | 27 ft 3 in (8.3 m) | [12][13] |
| Rodney | 10,300 long tons (10,500 t) | 8,259.0 ihp (6,160 kW) | 11,156.0 ihp (8,320 kW) | 90 psi (620.5 kPa) | 325 ft 0 in (99.1 m) | 68 ft 0 in (20.7 m) | 27 ft 3 in (8.3 m) | [12][13] |
| Benbow | 10,600 long tons (10,800 t) | 8,658.0 ihp (6,460 kW) | 10,860.0 ihp (8,100 kW) | 90 psi (620.5 kPa) | 330 ft 0 in (100.6 m) | 68 ft 6 in (20.9 m) | 28 ft 4 in (8.6 m) | [12][13] |
Costs
[edit]The general standard with British warships was to quote the cost of the ship not including the guns and dockyard incidental charges. Published navy estimates give a slightly more detailed breakdown of costs.
| Ship | Hull | Contracts | Fitting, etc. | Differences | Total direct charges excluding guns |
Guns | Indirect charges | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Propelling machinery |
Auxiliary machinery |
Gun mountings and torpedo-launchers |
Unspecified | ||||||||
| Collingwood [14] | £449,350 | £101,450 | £4,126 | £48,771 | £30,490 | £2,809 | £636,996 | £69,081 | £41,276 | £747,353 | |
| Anson [15] | £424,641 | £109,453 | £4,090 | £76,532 | £46,654 | £661,370 | £63,569 | £55,902 | £780,841 | ||
| Camperdown [15] | £444,112 | £109,757 | £3,673 | £77,846 | £41,635 | £677,023 | £92,988 | £55,902 | £825,913 | ||
| Howe [16] | £412,343 | £106,693 | £3,351 | £77,192 | £940 | £42,859 | -£6,482 | £636,896 | £66,621 | £55,902 | £759,419 |
| Rodney [16] | £438,126 | £105,500 | £3,422 | £83,067 | £35,850 | -£1,218 | £664,747 | £104,929 | £55,902 | £825,578 | |
| Benbow [16] | £536,305 | £110,876 | £1,410 | £83,126 | £27,985 | £471 | £760,173 | £14,618 | £56,674 | £831,465 | |
For the Collingwood, there are separate figures for "gun mountings" (£47,340) and "torpedo gear" (£1,431).[14]
Cost growth compared with previous battleships
[edit]With "battleships, the cost per ton weight of hull has increased from £48 for the Devastation, constructed in 1869-73, to £68 per ton for the Dreadnought, constructed between 1870-79, while the cost is £80 per ton for the Collingwood and £72 for the Camperdown. The weight of hull in the Devastation, Howe and Rodney are identical, but the cost for materials has increased from £182,000 to £250,000, and for labour from £106,000 to £205,000. The increase is distributed over all elements of cost."[17]
"The increased power of the gun has led to the substitution of compound for iron plates. The mean cost of armour per ton was £50 for the Devastation, £95 14s for the Colossus, and £95 12s for the Collingwood and Rodney. Again the weight of guns having been advanced beyond the capability of manual labour, at first steam, and more recently hydraulic power, has been substituted. The cost of the hydraulic mountings for the Collingwood is £43,155, and in the later ships of the same type no less than £75,000, a large sun for which there was no corresponding charge in the ships of the date of the Devastation." [17] The hydraulic gun mountings for British battleships at that date were supplied by Sir WG Armstrong Mitchell & Company's Elswick works.[17]
"The propelling machinery of the Devastation cost £63,200, of the Colossus £93,433, Collingwood £87,500, and Howe £103,000." [18]
Value in old age
[edit]In March 1906, Admiral Sir Arthur Wilson (commander-in-chief Channel Fleet) wrote to the First Sea Lord proposing that in the event of war with Germany, the Royal Navy should "destroy the forts at Cuxhaven and so free our way through to the entrance of the Canal and Hamburg. For this purpose the old Admiral class if their [gun] mountings are put in order and [gun] sights adjusted are as good as any of our latest ships and it wold not matter if they left their bones there after the work was done.... Only the barbette guns need be manned so there would be few men exposed."[19]
Service history
[edit]Collingwood
[edit]Collingwood was commissioned at Portsmouth on 1 July 1887 for Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee Military Review, and was paid off into Reserve in August. She was posted to the Mediterranean, where she served from November 1889–March 1897. She was coastguard ship at Bantry from March 1897–June 1903, when she paid off into the reserve, where she remained until sold.
Rodney
[edit]Rodney was commissioned on June 20, 1888 into the Home Fleet. She was held in reserve until July 1889, and after taking part in manoevres until September she served with the Channel Fleet until May 1894. She was then posted to the Mediterranean, remaining there until 1897. Thereafter she was coastguard ship at Queensferry until February 1901. She remained in reserve until being sold in 1909.
Howe
[edit]Howe was delivered at Portsmouth on 15 November 1885, complete except for her main armament. She was commissioned in July 1889 to take part in fleet manoevres. Finally fully armed, she was posted to the Channel Fleet in May 1890, and then to the Mediterranean. On 2 November 1892, she grounded on Ferrol[20] Rock, and was salvaged with great difficulty, being finally freed on 30 March 1893. She paid off at Chatham for repairs and overhaul, and then served in the Mediterranean until 1896, when she became port guard ship at Queenstown. In 1901, she was relegated to the reserve, where she remained until sold in 1910.
Camperdown
[edit]Camperdown was commissioned at Portsmouth on 18 July 1889, and initially went into reserve. In December 1889 she was posted to the Mediterranean Fleet as flagship, where she remained until being posted as flagship of the Channel Fleet in May 1890. She was paid off in May 1892 into Fleet reserve, recommissioning in July 1892 into the Mediterranean Fleet. On 22 June 1893, she collided with and sank the battleship Victoria with 358 deaths, including Vice-Admiral Sir George Tryon (See Victoria for details). In September 1899, she went into Category B reserve, and in May 1900 into Dockyard reserve. In July 1900 she commissioned as a coast guard ship at Lough Swilly until May 1903. She was in reserve at Chatham until 1908, and was employed at Harwich as a berthing ship for submarines until she was sold in 1911.
Anson
[edit]Anson arrived at Portsmouth from the builder's yard in Pembroke in March 1887, and lay at anchor for two years, slowly completing for sea while waiting for her guns to be manufactured. She finally commissioned on 28 May 1889 as flagship of the Rear-Admiral, Channel Fleet. On 17 March 1891 passenger steamer SS Utopia accidentally collided with stationary Anson in the Bay of Gibraltar. 562 of Utopia's passengers and crew and two rescuers from HMS Immortalité were killed in the accident.[21] Anson did not report any injuries or damage.
In September 1893, Anson was transferred to the Mediterranean, where she served until January 1900, with a refit at Malta in 1896. She returned home and paid off at Devonport in January 1901, re-commissioning for the newly formed Home Fleet in March of the same year. In May 1904, Anson finally paid off into reserve, where she remained until sold on 13 July 1909.
Benbow
[edit]Benbow was commissioned on 14 June 1888 for the Mediterranean Fleet, with which she served until October 1891. She was then held in the Reserve until March 1894, with two short commissions to take part in manoeuvres. Until April 1904 she served as guardship at Greenock, and thereafter remained in the Reserve until sold in 1909.
Notes
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Chesneau & Kolesnik 1979, p. 29.
- ^ a b Chesneau & Kolesnik 1979, pp. 29–30.
- ^ Chesneau & Kolesnik 1979, p. 30.
- ^ The Naval Annual 1904, The principles and methods of armour protection in modern war-ships, by William H White, p112.
- ^ Parkes, "British Battleships", p300.
- ^ a b c d Parkes, "British Battleships", p317.
- ^ Parkes, "British Battleships", p320-1.
- ^ a b c d TA Brassey, The Naval Annual 1886, p57.
- ^ a b c TA Brassey, The Naval Annual 1886, p58.
- ^ The Naval Annual 1904, The principles and methods of armour protection in modern war-ships, by William H White, p114.
- ^ a b c TA Brassey, The Naval Annual 1887, p275-9.
- ^ a b c d e f TA Brassey, The Naval Annual 1890, part II.
- ^ a b c d e f TA Brassey, The Naval Annual 1887, p278-9 for details of engine performance on trials and designed boiler pressures.
- ^ a b Navy Estimates for the Year 1888-89, p131. The 1888-89 navy estimates were the last ones to give a breakdown of costs for the Collingwood.
The value for "Dockyard incidental charges" was taken from Navy Estimates for the Year 1889-90, p279.
The Naval Annual 1892 p158 said the hull (including hydraulic machinery, gun mountings, etc.) cost £520,000, and the propelling machinery cost 104,000.
Parkes' British Battleships p300 said that the Collingwood cost £636,996 (£627,375). It is unclear why this book quotes two figures. - ^ a b Navy Estimates for the Year 1890-91, p 166-7; these were the last to give a breakdown of costs for the Anson and Camperdown.
The Naval Annual 1892 p157-8 said the Anson cost £724,765 and the Camperdown £769,456.
Parkes' British Battleships p317 said the Anson cost £662,582 and the Camperdown £677,724. - ^ a b c Navy Estimates for the Year 1889-90, p 172-4 and 220-1; these were the last to give a breakdown of costs for the Howe, Rodney and Benbow.
The Naval Annual 1892 p157, 161, and 164 said the Howe cost £560,469 for the hull and £106,553 for the propelling machinery; the Rodney cost £563,878 for the hull and £105,400 for the propelling machinery; whilst the Benbow cost £650,820 for the hull and £110,000 for the propelling machinery.
Parkes' British Battleships p317 and 320 said the Howe cost £639,434, the Rodney £665,963, and the Benbow £764,022 - ^ a b c TA Brassey, The Naval Annual 1886, p31.
- ^ TA Brassey, The Naval Annual 1886, p32.
- ^ Seligmann, Maththew S; Nägler, Frank; Epkenhans, Michael, eds. (2015). The naval route to the abyss', the Anglo-German naval race 1895-1914. Ashgate for the Navy Records Society. pp. 253–254. ISBN 9781472440938.
- ^ "DISASTER TO THE HOWE, THE VESSEL A TOTAL LOSS: Telegram from Admiral Fairfax"(1892) The Manchester Guardian, 5th November 1892, Page 8: Manchester <<Reuter's agency says:... the Howe is not yet floted. Every effort is being made to secure her on the rocks. Appliances to save the ship will be despatched immediately by the British Admiralty. ... at the mouth of Ferrol harbour... The Captain-General sent sent a gunboat and several large arsenal barges to upload the Howe's ammunition, small artillery and stores. The large artillery was then moved to the port side, in order to make the ship lean towards the sea... it might be possible to effect temporary repairs and to float and dock the ship.>> (in English)
- ^ The Dead of the Utopia. The New York Times, 20 March 1891.
Bibliography
[edit]- Chesneau, Roger; Kolesnik, Eugene M. (1979). Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships, 1860–1905. London: Conway Maritime Press. ISBN 0-85177-133-5.