A Uniform System of Rigs for Boats and Launches.
The Chairman:—
The subject before the Institute is one of importance to the Navy; for it does not appear that experience has produced in our service a system of boats and their sailing equipment. And, while the greater force of opinion inclines towards one rig as tile best for cutters, the Varieties of preference are not less numerous than the classes of boats and sails in use.
Safety, carrying capacity combined with fair speed, and capability of united action in fleets, are prime qualities in boats as in ships of war. In the organization of a system of boats for a man-of-war, the number and dimensions having been determined, the equipment should be designed to secure unity and precision in maneuvering under oars or sail. The classes of boats being reduced to the lowest possible number, and a uniform plan of equipment employed, the ships of the Navy will meet on even ground in that respect. I shall not enlarge upon this idea, but I consider it an important one; and I would carry the practice so far as to make the equipment of uniform size and interchangeable for the same class of boats.
A noiseless exhaust of steam being secured in the steam launches, the requirements of the torpedo service properly controls their equipment. Should spars and sails be supplied for use when abandoning ship, they ought to be of the same pattern as those for the sailing launches; and, in readiness for such an emergency, the boat should be stowed without its boiler.
Gigs, dinghies, and catamarans, of small carrying capacity, and not of the line of service boats, may be fitted as desired, and will furnish sufficient scope for the American desire for speed and novelty.
The service boats may be considered as of two classes, viz.; launches, and cutters; the former including the steam launches when used without boilers, and the latter the whale boats. One size of whale boats, and two or three each of cutters and launches, should be sufficient; the dimensions of each size being enforced by regulation for all new boats.
I am of the opinion that launches should be rigged as sloops, the boom being fitted always with a topping lift. The gaff topsail is worthless in such boats, and works contrary to the rule of simplicity and handiness. Let us have as little gear as possible in our boats.
I prefer for all other service boats the rig known as the sliding gunter, regarding it as safe, economical, handy, and sufficiently powerful. The shape of the principal sails in this rig, that of the leg-of-mutton, has found favor among boatmen almost everywhere. The centre of effort is brought low, whatever arnount of canvass is spread, by altering the length of the masts and the foot of the sail; and reefing is accomplished in a moment. For the foremast, a slot should be cut in the fore-and- aft piece, abaft the mast hole, and a guide board placed under the thwart, extending fro4n the forward edge of the mast hole to the step, and flush with both. In making sail, the heel of the mast, pointed through the slot, slides upon the guide board and passes into the step without delay. The slot is then closed by a close fitting chock. For the mainmast, the slot is cut and the guide board placed upon the opposite side. With these arrangements, the short lower masts of the sliding gunter are most readily shipped and unshipped. In point of speed, there may be a slight difference in favor of the lug or the sprit sail, but I doubt it; and if such is the case, the superiority in that respect is obtained at the expense of the more important qualities of handiness and safety. There is another small argument in favor of the sliding gunter, which will appeal most to the Executive Officer. In a somewhat extended experience in that capacity, I have found that boats with the sliding gunter require, generally, fewer repairs for accidental injuries. The masts and topmasts are seldom broken, or carried away in use; and the boat gets few hard knocks, which may or may not be due to the superior handiness of boats with that rig.
I regard the sprit sail as unworthy of use. The dipping lug, used with a jigger, is still the regulation sail for cutters in the English Navy. It is an admirable sail in many respects, and appears to suit the broader English boats. The Forbes rig for cutters, illustrated by the drawing on the board, is a modification, apparently, of the lug sail, and, judging from the drawing, I should say it is a great improvement. It appears to obviate the necessity of dipping.
During my last service at sea I was a long time in the harbor of Montevideo, and I know of no better place for testing boats under all circumstances. The preference which I urge is chiefly the result of long observation and comparison of our own boats and those of the numerous men-of-war lying in that port. I remember that on one occasion we communicated with a mail steamer during the prevalence of a hard pampero, using one of the large cutters and sliding gunter sails, after others of our own boats and a large cutter with lug sail from the English flag ship had failed in the attempt. When hard work was to be done we looked to the sliding gunters to do it; and I do not think they were ever beaten in any weather by foreign boats. The practical judgment of the men, accustomed to handle the boats daily, is generally correct. I have had many proofs of their preference for the sliding gunter over boats of equal size and model fitted with other sails, notwithstanding an occasional enthusiasm for the lug and the sprit sail, which I regarded as the expression of excitement and love of danger.
One word more as to uniformity and system. I have often witnessed with admiration the precision of evolution under sail of the boats of the English and French. The latter excel, and I think it is due to the uniformity of their boats and equipment. Under oars our own boat drills are excellent, the rapidity of evolution being governed by the full speed of the slowest boat; but, when sail is made, the inequality of our boats becomes apparent to a degree suggestive of regret and sometimes of mortification. The French have but one size of whale boats and distinct classes or sizes of cutters, and the area of sail is determined with an approach to equality of speed. The sliding gunter possesses peculiar facilities for sailing in squadron. By bridling up the foresail, or letting go the halliards, nice alterations in speed may be produced and the unity and order of the squadron preserved. Other equipment may possess this facility, if not in an equal degree; and if the boats of a ship are supplied upon IMO plan, slight alterations in the area of sail, easily made on board at the beginning of a cruise, will lead in these drills to the perfect unity and support which in a larger field is the soul of success. When boats of widely different lines and rigs meet in our squadrons, the evolutions are not well per. formed. To alter the sails on board ship and to reduce them to one class, takes time and costs money. And what if one commander employs one rig and his friend in the squadron chooses another? The English have sacrificed speed in their boats for carrying capacity. Should we not spare a little, if necessary, for objects as valuable?
Lieut.-Comdr. Train. I think that it is extremely difficult to decide upon a rig that would suit any particular class of boats in our service, until all the boats composing the class are constructed on somewhat the same model and intended for the same purposes. As affairs are managed at present, the first cutter of one of our vessels may be the rejected barge of some admiral, the whale boat may have been bought from a New Bedford whaler; and the rig that would suit such boats, of no use except for carrying passengers,—would be totally unfitted for an old-fashioned, large, heavy, useful first cutter, or a cumbrous navy-yard- built whale boat. An attempt has been made to get boat rigs into some kind of a system; but I do not think it was successful, as ships are not now fitted out in accordance with it. Until some such system is applied to the models of the boats as well as to the rigs, each commanding officer or first lieutenant will be obliged to cut and re-cut until he gets his sails to suit his boats.
So far as the choice of rigs is concerned, I have yet to see anything superior to the sliding gunter, as fitted here, for the ordinary whale boat or cutter. I know of no objection to it except that when blowing fresh the yard occasionally is carried away, but it is easily replaced. In regard to the rig of a launch, I am decidedly in favor of the sloop rig. I do not mean by sloop rig the yachting affair you sometimes see, with gaff topsail and flying jib, but an honest, stout mainsail and jib, wire rigging, a boom topping lift, an iron rod over the tiller for the traveler for the main sheet, plenty of ballast, and a false keel. Rigged in this way, a launch becomes a serviceable vessel, and can be sent away with a surveying party for two or three weeks, or can carry passengers or provisions across a stormy sound thirty or forty miles wide, to some purpose. Of course the objection to this rig—that it has to be permanent, as it were, and that the mast cannot be stepped and unstepped by signal from the ship in boat exercise—will have different weight with different officers. For myself, when I rig a launch I want it rigged for use; and in a launch when rigged, the oars should be auxiliary and the sails permanent, and not the other way.
Lieut. BELKNAP. I believe the chief end of men-of-war boats to be capacity for carrying great weights with safety; that this has to a great extent been sacrificed for beauty and speed, in the boats built for our service, I think but few will deny. Very few if any of our vessels carry enough boats as they are now built to accommodate their crews; and, in case of abandoning a ship, a third, if not more, of the crew would be obliged to trust themselves to such rafts as could be hastily improvised for the occasion. In an instance which came recently uncle? my observation, five boats were all that one hundred and thirty people had to depend upon in case of accident to the ship, and when all were in the boats, the gunwales were but an inch or two above the surface of the water. The boats could have taken probably seventy people with safety. Abandoning ship, it is true, rarely occurs except for exercise; but anchors, provisions, and large bodies of men have frequently to be carried, and those of us who have had such boat duty well know the anxiety experienced when a moderate sea was encountered. With more beam and higher freeboard we would gain not only greater carrying capacity, but also greater comfort and safety. The first thing, then, to be done is to alter the construction of our men-of-war boats; after that, to choose a rig which would give as much speed as compatible with safety. If we decide to build boats similar to those in foreign navies, we will probably find it necessary to adopt the rigs used by them. The sliding gunter rig, so favorably regarded in our service, may be found to be totally unsuitable for a boat with more beam and higher freeboard. For cutters built upon French models, for instance, I doubt if our experience would lead us to adopt other than the French rig, Pending the construction of more seaworthy boats, I would state that I think the sloop rig for launches both unwieldy and unsafe. I have in mind two instances, and no doubt many of you can recall others, where launches have capsized, owing to the defects inherent to this rig. A squall strikes the launch, the boat heels, the boom takes the water, and over it goes; or the order is given to drop the peak, and in the excitement of the moment the topping lift is let go as well, with the same result, The mast is so long and heavy that the launch must be rigged alongside ship, and the ballast must be passed in. If the latter is metal, it is apt to damage the boat; if sand, it takes up all the room amidships. There is so much gear, especially when two jibs and a gaff topsail are carried, that it takes some time to reeve it off, besides continually fouling. In boat exercise, the launch cannot shove off from the ship under oars, and step masts and make sail afterwards with the other boats; besides, when once rigged and ballasted for sailing, sail it must, wind or no wind, for it is almost impossible to drive such a weight through the water with oars. The masts of all boats should be cut the neat length from the after to the forward thwart: they may then be laid, when not in use, upon the fore and aft piece, the cover Passed and neatly lashed, while the fore and stern sheets would be free. Launches and cutters should be rigged with jib, and lug fore and main sails, the only difference being that both fore and main sails should have dipping lugs in cutters, while launches should have dipping lug foresail and standing lug mainsail. The peaks of the lugs should be high, to counterbalance the lack of height in the masts. This rig combines the advantages of uniformity, Simplicity, ease of handling, and safety. Whaleboats and gigs should have the sliding gunter rig, which, though cumbersome when not in use, is perhaps the rig best calculated to gain speed with safety in single banked boats. Dinghies should be fitted with a leg-of-mutton sail; and in connection with this boat I may say it is at present neither a dinghey nor a cutter. I think it would be better to do away with it, in its present form, and to substitute a two-oared or a four-oared skiff. The advantages of a boat of the latter description are too well known to need mention.
Lieut. Wise. For cutters and whaleboats I believe the sliding gunter rig to be, the best; but mention having been made of some of the disadvantages of that rig, I want to call attention to the Chinese rig. I have seen a ship's cutter, rigged with the ordinary lug foresail and boom mainsail, very much improved in sailing qualities and in safety by adapting to the sails the Chinese fast-boat bamboos. Sails thus extended are very fiat, are quickly and easily reduced to suit any breeze, and when furled are light and do not take up more space than with the ordinary yard, boom, or sprit.
Lieut. Soley. I am very glad that this subject has been brought before the Institute, because I am sure that it is one which merits a great deal of consideration, which it rarely receives. In presenting my views, I wish first to bring to your notice a point which I think is often neglected and that is—For what use are the boats intended? If they are to be considered as intended for pleasure boats, or for pulling or sailing races, I am ready to discuss them from this standpoint. But I do not think they are intended for any such purpose. A man-of-war is a fighting machine, and everything on board should be prepared and equipped with a view to fitness for that common end. The boats may be used for fighting and very often are; sometimes more than the ship is: therefore I say that they should be built, rigged and fitted to best carry men, guns, arms, ammunition, food, and water, under all circumstances, and that every detail should be in unison with the purpose for which the whole is intended. There is another use for boats only second to the one which has just been mentioned and that is a refuge in case of accident to the ship. How many of our ships are there today which can float their crews in their boats, even if they can lower them, and how many boats are fitted so that if lowered in a seaway they can be readily detached from the falls?
These two considerations seem to me to be of such vital importance that they must be paramount in the subject under discussion this evening; and no matter how we may think, no one can divest himself of a certain amount of responsibility, for if any one of us finds himself conducting an expedition, and is obliged to leave behind a large proportion of the men who should go, because the fast pulling boats will not carry them in rough water, or because the boats are so encumbered With large sails and heavy spars that they have no room left, or still worse if in the dark watches of the night there comes a sudden crash and the order to abandon ship, what is to become of the poor fellows who have no stations in the boats? If any condition of effectiveness in the parts of our fighting machines is neglected, then each one who does not strive for their betterment becomes responsible.
I knew beforehand that I should find myself in the minority in discussing the rig of pulling launches. I do not deny that the sloop rig us pleasant to the eye, and that it is convenient for certain work. The spars are five in number; bowsprit, mast, topmast, gaff and boom: the sails are three; jib, mainsail, gaff topsail. The spars and sails are large and heavy, and I think everyone will confess that he is glad to get under a yard or a davit to step his mast, and when that is done it takes some time to. bend the sail and get everything ready for sailing: let us now apply either of the tests you like to this rig and see how it will suit. Suppose the launch is going on a distant expedition; it contains a 12-pdr. howitzer, 28 men, ammunition, field and boat carriage, water, provisions, stove, anchor and chain, oars, masts and sails etc. The wind may have been fair at starting and we made sail and all went well. But after a while the wind came ahead with a little sea. Now we have a difficult task to perform, viz., to unstop the mast, unbend the sails, and stow them all so that they will not be in the way for pulling; and it reads very much more easy than it really is. Or if we apply the other test, where shall we find the boat which is about the best sea boat in the ship, and can carry most people; snugly secured in cranes, with upright davits topped; the spars are so large that they are kept on the booms, the sails are so large that they are in the Ballroom. What are the prospects of those who are stationed in the launch when the ship is abandoned? One thing more about the sloop rig; I think it is dangerous; no boat should be so rigged unless it is decked over, partially at least, and properly ballasted.
Now I wish to suggest for the launches, two lug sails, dipping, the forward one being the larger, and with the seam abreast the foremast cut to the yard so that the forward part of the sail acts as a jib, and it really' is not dipped at all; two masts and two yards are required only, and these would be of a size not excessive. These sails could be kept in the boat at all, times and they, with their masts, are easily stowed or handled.
For cutters and whaleboats I am in favor of the sliding gunter rig, as I think it combines most advantages. The sails can always be kept in the boats and do not take up more room than any other rig. I think the whale boats should all be fitted with center boards. It has always seemed to me that our boats have too small rudders, at any rate it has been my experience that ships' boats work better when I have had the rudder enlarged. The sprit sail rig which is sometimes supplied for gigs and whale boats I think deserves the strongest condemnation: it is awkward, not easily reefed and very inconvenient to stow.
With regard to steam launches a great deal may be said, though possibly they were not intended to be included in the scope of the discussion. The same tests of fitness should be applied to these boats as to any other integral parts of the fighting whole. And I do not think this point can be urged too strongly, because it is too often slighted. The usefulness of these boats more than of any others depends upon their possessing certain qualities which fit them for battle, and every other consideration should be made subordinate to the one which would make them fit for battle service. They may be used for towing the other boats into action or for fighting with torpedoes at night. In either case they should be noiseless, as the success of an expedition may depend on the secrecy with which it is conducted. There is scarcely one steam launch or cutter in our service which fulfils this condition. I think I may safely say that there is not one which was made in this country. I do not believe that there is a single Engineer Officer here present who will say that such a thing is impossible; in fact we all know it is not. And yet why is such a vital consideration neglected? On a quiet evening one of our steam launches can be heard nearly three miles off, and this one objection would militate seriously against the fitness of the boat for such duty. If it is possible to do away with this objection let it be done. If it is necessary to use fan blowers, let us have them; if it is necessary to have more grate surface, let us have it; if it is necessary to exhaust into a larger aperture, let it be done, but, at any rate, stop the noise. And. moreover the steam launches or very few of them are built or fitted for work at sea. We are not going to use them always in smooth water: if one of our vessels meets an enemy at sea and can lower a fast launch with a torpedo, then we shall be two to one. But that launch must be strong enough to hold its engines and boiler with steam up before it is lowered, it must have steel protection for its men from musketry fire, in the shape of turtle-back or shields; it must be able to use salt water, it must be able to work in a considerable sea. I have no doubt that we can have such a boat if it is demanded. Why should we not have some now to try, to see what we may want in the future? The Chairmen has said something about the rig of catamarans. I think that as they are made now of india rubber and sometimes kept on deck and sometimes below, they are, when on deck, only a good substitute for a life buoy, and that the principal part of the rig should be bread and water secured to the raft in a water-tight box. If the discussion permitted something might also be said about life saving appliances. This part of the subject is well worthy of consideration. Few of our ships can float their whole crews in case of accident, and it seems to me that we ought to try to have all boats fitted with detaching apparatus and in addition to have collapsing boats or bridge rafts so that in an emergency all hands can be floated. But above all things let us remember that our boats are intended for fighting and that every detail of build, rig or equipment should be in harmony with that object.
P. A. Eng. Kafer:—The man-of-war boat which will be of the greatest use in time of war is the steam propelled boat, be it either launch or cutter, and it is well worth while to devote a part of the time allotted to the discussion of the rig of boats to the consideration of the question whether we have the steam launch or cutter best adapted to the demands of naval service.
The object of a steam launch is not the same as that of the sailing launch—to be able to transport men and guns—but to float the motive power necessary to tow a number of boats carrying men and guns, at a fair rate of speed. To do this the hull must be as small as possible, or the maximum motive power should be placed in a hull of given size. The nature of the service limits this size, in length, to about thirty-five feet, and as a fair rate of speed is desired this length also limits the breadth. Moreover to obtain the best results the draught should be very nearly constant; but this is impossible where the launch is made to carry men and guns. Therefore it may be assumed that in order to have a constant draught and displacement, the steam launch or cutter should be of sufficient size to carry its machinery and necessary supplies, and these only. I have said that the length is limited to about thirty five feet, for beyond that a boat cannot be hoisted to the davits or swung on board conveniently. Were it not for this, it would be better to build a steam launch larger so as to make its lines finer; this would decrease its resistance and make it more efficient for towing or for speed.
A steam launch or cutter should be decked over whenever possible, so as to make the boat safe in any ordinary sea; safety being the first requisite of such a boat. Again, the machinery should be simple in design and of sufficient strength to stand the rough usage to which it is generally subjected.
Economy in fuel is also one of the chief requisites of a good launch; but to gain this to any extent while maintaining the average speed now attained, it would be necessary to increase the size of the boiler to correspond to the increased grate surface required. With a natural draught the consumption of coal will not be more than ten pounds per square foot of grate surface which will give about a 21. Horses power. To consume even this amount of coal, an artificial draught may be necessary, and assuming that 25 indicated horses-power is required to propel the launch at a speed of eight knots per hour it will take a boiler with ten square feet of grate to furnish the steam. Such a boiler would be a large one if constructed after the design of the boilers at present furnished to naval steam launches. To get the requisite power from a small boiler, it is necessary to use an artificial draught, increasing the consumption of coal per square foot of grate surface and making it necessary to carry a much larger fuel supply. If the draught is increased by discharging the exhaust steam into the funnel, there is the disadvantage of being unable to supply to the boiler the water which might be furnished were the exhaust steam condensed in a surface condenser. When the exhaust steam.is used to increase the draught it is necessary to carry fresh water in tanks, adding to the weight to be carried. With a condenser and natural draught, the boiler might be much larger without increasing the weight to be carried above that of boiler and water in tanks.
The noise caused by the exhaust steam, discharging directly into the funnel, to which objection has been made, may be obviated by discharging the exhaust into a closed tank, and keeping an almost continuous flow from it into the atmosphere.
The machinery of a steam cutter may be made fairly economical and within the limit of weight for boiler, engine, water and fuel, by having a keel condenser and air pump, a boiler with circulating water tubes and by using a noiseless blower to increase the consumption of fuel.
Passed-Assistant Engineer Manning. Some of the gentlemen who have spoken this evening have objected to the type of machinery at present in use in our steam launches, on account of the noise it makes, which would render the boats useless as torpedo boats when the operations were to be secret, as they would announce their approach by the noise of the exhaust. Another strong objection to the present type is the expense and trouble of keeping them supplied with fresh water for their boilers. The question as to whether the Herreshoff system of machinery, which would avoid both these troubles, would not be preferable to our present type, has, I think, been very fully answered in the negative by Mr. Isherwood's recent report on that subject.
In order to avoid the noise of the exhaust, which in our launches, as in locomotives, is used as a blast to urge the combustion, we must condense the exhaust steam, and urge the combustion by means of a fan blower which could be driven directly from the shaft, or by the independent steam pump with which our launches are always fitted. The condenser could be of the type used so successfully by Herreshoff, being merely a copper tube running nearly twice the length of the keel, outside the vessel, thus saving the fresh water to return to the boiler. It is not usual, at present, to carry steam on any of our launches at much over one hundred pounds per gauge, but this could readily be increased to three times that pressure, and in that way the weight of machinery considerably decreased, with a probable increase of wear and tear. The weight of the present type of machinery makes our steam launches wet and uncomfortable, not to say unsafe, in a moderate seaway; and so any method of reducing the weights would be advantageous. In this respect, the weight of the fan blower and tube condenser would be less than the present fresh water tanks and the mean amount of water carried in them. As economy of fuel is not a matter of much importance in such craft, I think we will someday have a small boiler which will successfully use the liquid hydrocarbons as fuel, which would reduce the weight of both boiler and fuel. No one will deny that our present type of launch is a vast improvement over that of the first ones we ever had, which were twin screws, built in England, and used off Charleston and elsewhere as picket boats during the war; but no improvements have been made in the last ten years, during which time very considerable advances have been made in steam engineering. It is a mistaken idea that three hundred pounds pressure of steam is any more dangerous than one hundred, and the extra two hundred pounds costs very little in heat, comparatively speaking. As to the boats themselves, they should be of steel, and with sufficient air tanks to float them, even when waterlogged.
New York Branch.
March 18, 1880.
Lieut.-Comd'r Chadwick, U. S. N., in the Chair.
Lieut. Noyes. - I suppose the universal criticism on our boats is that they are built for speed under oars and nothing else. Certainly, the long list of victories over the men-of-war boats of other nations in pulling races shows them to be superior in that respect, but there are a few other qualifications more valuable, in my opinion. First, 1 count capacity for carrying especially valuable, in view of the use of men-of-war's men ashore under arms. In this our boats are very faulty, for in the effort to make them speedy and with handsome lines, the necessary beam and high free board are lost sight of. AS striking instances of this, I can cite the cutter of the Juniata bought at the Navy Yard, Toulon, in 1871; pulling twelve oars, it could carry as many men and arms as the sixteen oared cutters four feet longer, of the Richmond. These two may be taken as representing the different styles of French and American building. Again, the launch of the Juniata could not float the howitzer, ammunition and crew for which she was fitted. Second: the weather lines under oars or sail are too fine. Under oars, our single banked boats lack the necessary free board to pull dry in rough weather; they are too fine forward and they carry too many oars. Under sail, they are too long for their beam to work handily, too crank to carry sail, and, having no keel nor centre-board, they fall rapidly to leeward.
Our launches have the same faults, being built for speed solely. They are too fine forward and too low and are wet and leewardly in rough weather. Launches should be sloop rigged, with jib, stay-sail and main-sail; the lower mast short, the main-sail square on the bead and with but little hoist. A short, stout topmast would set a gaff topsail for light weather, without much extra gear, and would also do for signaling. The sail should balance with a single reef in the mainsail and the stay-sail alone set, so that in rough weather the boom would be in. The objection to the weight of a signal mast and the consequent difficulty in shipping it could be obviated by a box opening aft, from the step to the thwart, which would keep the heel of the mast always in place when stepping; and by using the jib halliards from forward the weight would not be felt.
To our cutters, the same criticism, as to being built for speed alone, applies but in a greater degree. In addition, they are framed too heavily with the exception of the keel, which should be heavier than at present and the main strength of the boat. They should have vastly fuller bows; heavier stem pieces would enable them to carry and use a Gatling gun, an impossibility now. How necessary this last will become we may know if we are ever obliged to do patrol duty, watching against a night torpedo attack.
All the men-of-war boats I have seen lack several minor useful appurtenances found necessary in foreign men-of war boats; such as, a permanent boat chest, chocks to close row-locks when under sail. The booms and masts are very badly arranged even where the rig best adapted to the boat is used. The masts often ship through a hole in a fore and aft piece on the thwarts, necessitating standing upon the thwarts to ship them. Masts should clamp to the thwart, and the above mentioned box from step to thwart, should be built in strongly; it is impossible for a mast to go adrift at the heel with such a box and that it has been used for 'years in the whale boats of whalers is proof that it is practically serviceable. The jigger booms often ship through a hole in the stem and are unshipped with great difficulty; they should be stepped in a movable heel iron and be clamped over the top of the stem so as to allow them to be triced up. Cumbersome iron work is frequently put outside the stem for shipping the masts, flag staff's, do. All this should be inside and would be, I presume, were the boats not fitted with rings for hoisting, at the extreme ends---a most vicious practice, tending to break the back of any boat.
For the larger cutter I would recommend the rig shown in figure 1, with jib, fore and main sail and jigger. The advantages of this rig are a large spread of canvas, with the stern sheets fairly clear of booms and sheets, very little gear, while it is strong and easily reduced to handy sail for heavy weather. After taking in the jib and jigger, all the sail is in the boat at hand for reefing and shortening, and leaving enough sail to work the boat. The masts are short and the peaks of the lugs high ; the yards should be hoisted with a block fitted to the traveler, so that the halliards may not be slacked off, as is often the case with single halliards, when belaying.
For smaller cutters, of less than 28 feet length, if built with good beam, I would recommend the rig shown in Fig. 2. The training ship Minnesota has three cutters fitted in imitation of this rig, but unfortunately the imitation is very poor. The masts of the Minnesota's cutters are plumb, which is bad for hoisting a lug; the lugs are standing and very square on the head, and there is too much canvas aloft and too little below. The boats will not tack in any sort of a sea or with a fresh breeze, and the coxswains have so little reliance upon the working of' the boats under sail, except with a fair wind and sea, that they know but little of bending or making sail. The only rig for cutters comparable to the foregoing seems to be the sliding gunter, but that labors under the disadvantage of the sails, of necessity made up with the masts, being in the way when rowing.
Whale boats should be clinker built with good beam, flat floors, and centre-board. They should be fitted with a permanent arrangement for steering with an oar, and the stern should be fitted out under water with a piece of dead wood that they might have a Proper rudder. The sliding gunter is the best rig for whale boats, with all the sail inside the boat. The whale boats of the Minnesota are rigged with a dipping fore lug and a standing main lug, the fore lug being split at the mast to give a jib to the boat.
As a reason for the many varied rigs to be seen in our men-of-war boats, I may state that I have been told by experienced sail makers that it is the custom to build boats, to fit them with spars and booms and then to turn them over to the sail makers with orders to place sails wherever possible.
The Chairman. I am in favor for a sloop rig for launches and sliding gunter for all other boats except dinghies, which should be fitted with a simple sprit. The present order of the Department in regard to boats is very good, but it lacks uniformity. There is no use in having part of the cutters rigged with sliding gunter and part with sprit-sails. Both styles are good in themselves bulk of the two I prefer the sliding gunter as it allows boats to lie alongside ship with masts stepped, it is more easily handled in every way, besides being safer. The Chinese system of rig is well worth imitating in some respects. I agree entirely with Lieut. Noyes in thinking our boats defective in strength and carrying capacity, and that we should give up building boats for racing purposes and build them more for safety and comfort; but I disagree with him in thinking the rig in fig. I, a rig of lugs with jib and jigger, a good one. It is too cumbersome, there are too many sails and spars, and it is not at all equal to the sliding gunter rig in ease of handling.
Lieut. Hanford. We do not want all our boats rigged alike; a good rig for a launch might be a very poor one for a small cutter: but the idea that all boats of a certain size in the Navy should have the same rig is a good one. Safety, simplicity, weather lines and comfort are the points needed in all the boats of a man-of-war, except one or two in a large vessel, which should be fitted for speed.
I agree with Lieut, Noyes that our boats, as a rule, have not sufficient capacity and that two much is sacrificed to speed under oars. At the same time an endeavor should be made to give every - vessel one or two fast pulling boats, the rest to be more capacious. It is useless to expect one boat to have all the good qualities, or any one rig to be without defects. I would suggest for launches the sloop rig without gaff topsails: a topsail adds little or nothing to the speed and is rarely used, For the larger cutters I would suggest a sliding gunter rig, and for the smaller, the sprit: this gives both uniformity and variety. My experience is that the jigger rig is always bad.
Lieut. Comd'r. Goodrich. In the selection of a suitable rig for boats in the navy, the conservatism of individual taste and experience will necessarily enter as a powerful factor, since officers will naturally advocate that which they have themselves tried and found satisfactory as to appearance and performance. It would seem then that a fair discussion, having for its end a professional and impersonal good, ought to include on the part of those joining in it, not only arguments for the particular schemes advanced, but a realization of the influence of naval antecedents on the opinions formed. Of one thing I am certain, that there exists a wide-spread discontent: throughout the service, on this subject, founded on the lack of uniform rig of boats of similar class and their but too frequent inability to perform the simplest maneuvers under canvas, resulting in a reversal of the old maxim, that sailing should be the rule and pulling the exception for a man-of-war's cutter.
The usual classification of a ship's boats is as follows, viz., first, Steam launches and cutters; second, Sailing launches; third, Cutters; fourth, Whale boats; fifth, Gigs; sixth, Dinghies.
Let us begin with cutters as forming the principal portion of the complement. A cutter's rig should possess let, Efficiency in propelling, or, more simply, permit an ample spread of canvass. 2d, Balance of effort, indicated by a firm weather helm while on the wind, 3d, Simplicity—as few parts as practicable. 4th, Ease and rapidity of making sail. 5th, Convenience of stowage in the boat. 6th, No bowsprit. 7th, Handiness in reefing. 8th, Low centre of effort.
The first and second conditions maybe fulfilled in a variety of ways. The third condition, however, reduces the consideration to 'rigs of' not more than three sails and these sails must be as simply fitted as possible. A large dipping fore lug and a main lug either standing or dipping is perhaps the simplest of all. The liability of' the fore lug to get aback in tacking presents a most serious objection to this rig.—The fore lug may now be split, yielding an arrangement found in the Russian service, or the split may be developed into a separate jib dub making a three-sail rig. Another three sail rig is a jib with sliding gunter fore and main sails, the latter often provided with a boom. I may at once remark that my experience leads me to reject all dipping lugs and, briefly, to narrow down the choice to between the sliding gunter rig, just mentioned, and that composed of a jib and two standing lugs (the main with a boom.) In both the tack is hooked once for all and the only gear needed is halliards, sheets and main brails with one shroud on each mast opposite the halliards.
Under the fourth bead, the lug rig appears preferable, as one set of hands can be loosing the sails while the other is stepping the masts. In the gunter rig both operations cannot be effected simultaneously, although it does not follow that much time is thus lost. The lug rig offers the considerable advantage of showing no canvas above the rail until actually needed, and of permitting a complete dousing of sail in case of emergency, leaving the masts standing, if desired.
Under the fifth head the lug seems better, for no nuisance is greater, in a passenger boat, than that of stern sheets half blocked by spars projecting beyond the after thwart.
Under the sixth head it seems merely necessary to call attention to the undesirability of bowsprits. Sufficient canvas in the fore lug will be found to secure the proper balance.
It would appear that the gunter is, if anything, a trifle more handy than the lug in reefing. The gunter shape carries its own recommendation for a low center of effort. On the other hand, the question naturally arises whether, in order to secure sufficient spread of canvas, it might not be necessary to lengthen the masts, so as to place the center of effort not far from that of the lug, and at the same time to cause the spars to encroach too much on the stern-sheets. Altogether, I incline strongly to the lug rig indicated, while confessing that I have not had the opportunity of testing the gunter on a scale great enough to enable me to pronounce against it for cutters as absolutely as I do for it in gigs and whale boats.
As for dinghies, I suppose a sprit sail is as good as any, provided the mast be stepped so as to permit the sail to be used on a wind. Ordinarily the mast is so far forward as to forbid the sails being spread, except with a quartering wind.
Passing to the largest boats, the launches, why adhere to the cumbersome, complicated sloop rig? Even with the Selfridge step, it is very difficult to step the mast, except in smooth water, and the gear is desperately complex when one is in a hurry. Add a topmast, and the misery of the boat's crew is complete. I do not mean to say that our launches sail badly, but, in a boat's rig, something is demanded in addition to good sailing. The sail must be at the instant service of the men in the boat, and the spars readily handled without fear of damage. An average launch's crew would rather pull three miles than make sail. I have pointed out my preference for cutters. I am ready to be convinced that there are good reasons for not adopting it for launches as well. Steam launches and cutters are scarcely to be considered, as they would only be fitted with sails and spars on special occasions, when the best would be done for them which the circumstances permitted.
Boston Branch,
March 31, 1880.
Naval Constructor S. H. Pook, U. S. N., in the Chair.
The Chairman. In the hope that they may lead to discussion I would like the permission of the meeting to make a few general remarks concerning the rigs of boats.
Men-of-war boats, with the exception of steam launches, have experienced but little alteration during the last forty years, their latest dimensions being in accordance with the following order from the Bureau of Construction and Repair, dated April 1, 1870: —
"With a view of establishing a uniformity in the size of boats, the Department directs that hereafter all boats shall be built of the dimensions herein in closed, and that for whatever purpose a boat may be wanted, it shall be of the dimensions of the classes heroin given.
"The length of the boat is from the fore side of the rabbet of the stem to the after side of the stern, at the height of the top of the gunwale. The breadth is the extreme breadth; and the depth is from the top of the gunwale amidships to the lower edge of the rabbet of the keel. In addition to the ring bolts in the stein and stern, there will be one through the fore end of the keel, and another at an equal distance from aft, to be used, if necessary, in hoisting the boats."
Memorandum of Dimensions for Boats, April 1, 1870
Launches, Breadth = Length x .282; Depth = Breadth x .40
Steam Cutters, Breadth = Length x .260; Depth = Breadth x .46
Cutters, Breadth = Length x .258; Depth = Breadth x .37
Barges, Breadth = Length x .225; Depth = Breadth x .37
Gigs, Breadth = Length x .185; Depth = Breadth x .37
Whaleboats, Breadth = Length x .210; Depth = Breadth x .39
Dinghies, Breadth = Length x .265; Depth = Breadth x .37
Length of | Wabash, Colorado and Class | Guerriere, Lancaster and Class | Severn, Pensacola and Class | Ticonderoga, Plymouth and Class | Iroquois and Class | Shawmut and Class |
Launches | 34 feet | 34 feet | 32 feet | 32 feet | 30 feet | 28 feet |
Steam Cutters | 33 feet | 33 feet | 33 feet | 33 feet |
|
|
1st Cutters | 30 feet | 30 feet | 28 feet | 28 feet | 26 feet | 26 feet |
2d Cutters | 28 feet | 28 feet | 28 feet | 26 feet | 26 feet | 24 feet |
3d Cutters | 28 feet | 28 feet | 26 feet | 26 feet | 26 feet | 24 feet |
4th Cutters | 26 feet | 26 feet | 26 feet |
|
|
|
Whaleboats | 29 feet | 29 feet | 29 feet | 27 feet | 27 feet | 27 feet |
Barges | 32 feet | 32 feet | 30 feet |
|
|
|
Gigs | 30 feet | 30 feet | 28 feet | 28 feet | 28 feet |
|
Dinghies | 20 feet | 20 feet | 18 feet | 18 feet | 18 feet | 18 feet |
Although the shapes have been slightly modified by succeeding constructors, about the same proportionate scantling has been used for boats for many years. I think the number of boats allowed in our navy is in excess of that of other services. In some instances the boats have been built of iron and steel, especially the steam cutters. It has been the experience of our officers that wooden steam cutters give the most satisfaction, being kept in repair on shipboard at less expense; although if iron boats, especially launches, were properly cared for, they would last much the longer.
An iron steam cutter built for the Richmond was the means of saving the lives of all on board, as she was run into by a ferry boat and struck amidships. If she had been a wooden boat she would have been crushed to atoms, but being made of iron she was simply bent out of shape. The shape was readily restored, and the boat was fit for duty again in two days—although the bad performance of the steam machinery of the boat caused her to be left ashore, the iron hull was still perfect.
An iron launch has been in constant use at the Navy Yard, New York, for eight years, and she is good for three or four years more, whereas wooden launches last on the average but two cruises, when they have to be rebuilt.
Wood or steel, I would increase the motive power of our steam cutters, and make them useful as torpedo launches. I would make use of the designs of these boats to demonstrate the various experiments which it would seem desirable to make use of. It would not greatly increase the cost if the Herreshoff boiler was applied to the hulls of steam cutters, and the speed of piston increased so as to give four or five hundred revolutions to the screw per minute.
Throrneycroft boats have a speed of piston of six hundred in a minute. While they have only about eight miles per hour at the same number of revolutions, one hundred and fifty, that we have, they have nineteen miles per hour at a speed of piston of six hundred revolutions and the boat seems to rise in the water and leave the following wave far in the rear.
Do we need a working launch often for carrying an anchor? How often is it used for this purpose in a cruise, and when used is it effective? It would seem desirable that the working launch should be a very able boat, as she carries a gun forward, as well as the first cutter. The latter is generally too shoal for the work, under the present form and dimensions. I think if we are ever driven into war, that both these boats will be allowed steam power.
Second, third and fourth cutters are good boats generally, and in good proportions. The new barges, double banked, seem to give satisfaction. The gigs are generally racing boats, and are built more with that end in view than any other, light mantling long and low—for comfort they should be deeper boats. Our whale boats, being modelled after the New Bedford whale boat, give perfect satisfaction, so far as I know, both as row and sail boats,—they are generally fitted with centre boards.
The dinghies, I think, are all wrong; being market boats, they should be deep enough to take a barrel under the thwarts and made more with reference to the work they have to do than for a pretty appearance. I think that if they were built deeper and made stronger generally, and. of a somewhat fuller model they would give more satisfaction.
Although my preference, as regards the rigs of boats, is for sliding gunters, I should prefer to learn something on this point from the other members present.
The Hon. R. B. Forbes:—Permit me to present a few remarks on boats and boat fittings. Although I do not claim to be an expert in strictly naval affairs, I think I may claim some consideration from the fact that I began my nautical education at the early age of six and a half years; was captured three times by the English before I attained the age of nine years; began my sea life as a sailor at the age of thirteen; commanded a ship before twenty, and at the age of twenty-eight retired from the sea with a competency. When I say that I retired I ought to say that the retirement was rather nominal, as I continued as a merchant and a ship owner to go and to come until my last trip across the Atlantic in 1870. Since that date my sailings have been confined to short excursions in yachts and steamers, You will thus see that if I am not an expert I ought to be. I have always advocated progress, improvement, in all things. In 1823 I introduced the double top sail and the fidding of masts abaft. The original double top sail first introduced in the steam schooner Midas and soon after in the steam bark Edith and the propeller ship Massachusetts was improved by captain Howes—when I say improved I would not be understood as admitting that his rig was an improvement in appearance and in its adaptation to men-of-war, but it met the public want which called for something very cheap; something which could be put upon ships already built. My original rig required a long lower mast-head which in fact did duty as the topmast—Captain Howes hung his top sail or lower top sail yard to or near to the lower cap, and so the lower top sail was reduced to the size, or about the size of the common close reefed top sail. The rig could be applied, at a small expense, to any ship Whose masts were in place; his old style top gallant sail and his royal remained the same; the only alteration consisted in putting another yard upon the top mast and accommodating the sails called upper and lower top sails thereto. He procured a patent for his modification of my rig, and many ship owners adopted it and it has proved a great boon to seamen as well as to insurers, owners and masters. I hold that very little strictly original comes into the heads of thinking men—I remember that in my early voyages to the north of Europe I had seen many top sail schooners, and galliots, where the top sail hoisted upon the head of a lower mast; a head elongated so as to afford some hoist; I remember also, seeing the top gallant masts of one of our steam frigates, I think it was the Mississippi, fidded abaft; and I remember a small model of a ship given to me by Capt. Thomas Pierce, of Providence, which had top masts and top gallant masts fidded abaft. All I can claim of originality is the fitting of vessels with masts fidded abaft, in combination with double top sails and auxiliary steam power. One good feature of my rig as applied to the Massachusetts and Edith—one which I think a good deal of—is to be found in the fact that many of my spars and sails were convertible; that is to say, my fore yard was of the same general dimensions as the main top sail yard; my fore top sail yard the same as the main top gallant yard, and the fore top gallant the same as the main royal yard; and these relative proportions applied as well to the mizzen, so that fewer spare spars and sails were necessary, and on a pinch my main top sail could be made useful as a fore sail. On the first voyage of the Massachusetts the usefulness of this convertibility was well illustrated, as shown in the picture of the ship in the Lyceum. Most of the sails then set were badly split; some of them were so torn that not enough was, left to make a cover for the main hatch, and it was on that occasion that we found our spare sails come into play. I saw then what I could not have credited unless I had seen it: namely, canvas in strips and knots as hard as bullets; wound up and knotted so that nothing but fire could disentangle the snarls.
But I am wandering very far from my text. I began on boats, and I have gone off on rigs. The truth is that I wanted you to know—I wanted the young navy cadets to know—that what I propose to write about boats comes from one who has given much thought to the fitting of ships and boats.
When a new thing, however simple, is brought to the notice of seamen,— and especially old salts who have been running all their lives in one narrow groove,—the first inquiry is, "Has it been tried?" We will suppose that this inquiry is made in reference to the boat rigs and boat hoisting gear on page 10 of the pamphlet* I have presented to you. I answer that I have often fitted ships' boats and life boats like Nos. 2 and 3. The rig is simple, easily managed, and requires very little movement, which I consider very important in boat sailing. Rig No. 4 I always gave to the launches of my ships. I usually built and rigged the launch before the ship, and sailed her to and from the ship yard with one man. When I built the Antelope, in 1843-4, I rigged her launch in that way, and I well remember inviting several naval officers to go from South Boston to East Boston to see the little clipper Antelope. It was a squally spring day, and when my naval friends stepped into the launch, manned by myself and my ship keeper, they inquired if I was going to sail that craft in squally weather with only one man and a half. I said, "Certainly," and we shoved off. It was blowing fresh from the west or south-west, and as we ran under the lee of the Ohio, lying in the stream, I said, "Stand by, gentlemen, to keep her on her legs as we get under the lee." Any Duxbury boy would have understood that he was to get amidships when becalmed, and over to windward the moment she caught the breeze. I will not go further into details than to say we landed at East Boston in the midst of a hard squall, and I permitted no one to touch a rope or to give an order, save myself and my one man. My general impression is that if any of that crew are alive, they will date their first gray hair to that sail to East Boston with the split-lug-jib rig.
Although I had been much at sea and had often sailed in very badly rigged ship's boats, I may say that my education as a boat sailor began with the merchants at Canton and ended in yachting at home. All I learned about boat sailing while a sailor was not worth knowing. Ship masters, unless they happen to have learned how to sail a boat when a boy, somewhere on the coast, are, as a rule, very poor boat sailors; and sometimes men who were born on board of a boat, or brought up at Nantucket,—men supposed to know all about boats,—make the most ludicrous Mistakes in boat sailing when anything new is to be tried. I will recite a case in point: I sent to Nantucket a life boat rigged with two sprit sails like Nos. 2 and 3, with orders to try her under sail in a rough time, and report on the rig, a drawing of which was sent with the boat. The trial came off, and the crew said "all worked firstrate"; but there was some comment made on the difficulty of unshipping the sprit quickly. This led to inquiry, and I found that they had unshipped the sprits and doubled in the large lot of loose sail, which, close hauled, must have operated like a back sail. When I explained that they had only to sit still, slack the sheets, and brail-up the sprit, in order to reef, they did not hesitate to say that they had found the rig good under very unfavorable circumstances.
In rig No. 5, page 11, it will be seen that the sail which I call a jib hoists on a running rope fastened to the end of the yard, so that it can be taken in and set without lowering the main sail. In No. 4, page 10, the jib has grommets on the head, so that it can be bent and unbent with only one seizing; the other caring being a grommet which shoves over a small pin in the yard near the head of the main sail. The foot of the jib should have on it a small stick or yard, so that with the tack fast to the stem when going in stays on rough waters, it may be manipulated by the sheet, so as to insure tacking. The sheet should be made fast to the middle of the stick on the foot of the sail, so that in going large, the tack being slacked and the weather sheet hauled in, the jib becomes a studding-sail, taking a position parallel to the main boom. Nos. 1, 2, and 6, page 11, are excellent rigs for pleasure craft; but the spars are too long to stow in ship's boats.
In fitting four launches carrying Dahlgren navy howitzers, during the war, I gave them the rig No. 4, page 10, and in thoroughly trying them in competition, during several cruises with the "coast guard," I found them to work well; and all things were so proportioned as to stow snug and leave room for the guns and fittings, as well as for the officers in the stern sheets.
Every naval man must fully realize that economy of space and ability to work the sails with the least possible movement of the crew are very important. The boats of vessels of war are—or used to be— fitted with false keels or shoes, contrived to be screwed au and removed easily. I consider this, as compared to a center-board, a very poor contrivance to keep a boat from making leeway when sailing close-hauled; a thing very much in the way in landing, and in slewing a boat on a beach, or in the water by the oars. A center-board boat has no keel to stand in the way of stowing, and the box affords a good shifting-board to keep the ballast steady; it enables the boat to hold a good wind and with it she will be sure in stays. The only possible objection that can be made to it is in the fact that a centre board box, as usually fitted, prevents the stowage of another boat inside of her; but even this may be overcome by fitting the box to ship and unship without much more expense than the fitting on and taking off of the false keel. In consulting one of our naval men, now a commodore or an admiral, about centre boards, his chief objection seemed to be that as exercise at the oars is good for muscular development and full occupation a blessing, he preferred to pull to windward and so did not care specially for a weatherly craft. I thought this a very weak argument against centre boards, because we are not compelled to pull to windward instead of beating, and when necessary to warm up the men we can pull just as well in a centre board as in a keel boat. Everyone who has been much away in boats, especially in time of war, must admit that a boat which can beat well is the best for the comfort and health of the men. As a general rule the sails of boats in vessels of war are kept in their bags and very seldom used. Their constant use would tend much to give rest to the crew, to say nothing of valuable experiences. I have seen boats coming and going under oars in a hot sun from ships in such places as Macao roads, Montevideo, and Hampton roads, when sails would do the work in half the time and with much less exposure. The men in a ship of war get exercise enough for their muscular health, in carrying on the daily duties, and under hot suns every precaution should be taken to prevent unnecessary exposure. I am therefore a strong advocate for centre boards and for rigs that can be managed without dipping and with the least possible movement of the crew. The fine boats of the Navy usually known as whale boats, although very different from whale boats in model, should be rigged with the brailing sprit and they should be supplied with steering oars, so that on going through a surf they can be managed better than with a rudder. They are not, however, to be considered as good surf boats; they have centre boards I believe, and when properly rigged must be very fast under sail as well as with oars.
Finally, I desire to say a word on the hanging of boats: In war ships they should be hung so as to be very handy to swing out and in, and should be as far as possible out of the way of being swept off by a collision—a contingency very apt to happen in war times. Is this ever done? I mean on regularly rigged and fitted steam frigates? Is it not usual to see boats permanently hanging far out from the aide of the ship, ready to lower away, and ready to be swept away by daily occurrences? Instead of being hung abreast of the shrouds where they cannot be swung in, they should be placed between the shrouds, so that they can be swung in, and for sea use be kept much more out of the way. It has been said that the reason for hanging boats abreast of the shrouds is that the davits, can be supported by topping lifts: this does not seem to me a very strong argument against placing them elsewhere. Davits should be strong enough to support the boats of themselves. The small illustration of my plan for hanging boats on page 10 of the pamphlet will give a very fair idea of my mode of controlling the hanging of boats. If I were called on to fit a combined steam and sailing ship I would have her so fitted as to permit of running alongside of an enemy, grappling, and boarding her without losing a boat, without carrying away a shroud or an anchor. I would have a strong guard all round her, wide enough to protect the muzzles of the guns, and the lanyards of the shrouds. In a ship large enough to have this guard well out of water I would place it just below the port sills; in smaller vessels above the ports; in the first case, I would fill in after the manner of a "sponson," so as to break the shock of seas.
I do not know how far the muzzles of modern guns project, but I assume that a sponson of two and a half feet tapered off to about one foot at each end would permit of scraping alongside of a vessel without any catching of the usual projections. I can see no objections to the spousob of two and a half feet on a big ship, except its general appearance and the possibility of its interfering with depressing the guns where the sponson or guard is below, and of elevating greatly where it is above the guns. But I assume that gatlins, musketry, and howitzers are to look out for boats, and that a near approach to an enemy high out of water requires only point-blank range. When certain long, sharp steamers were devised and built early in the rebellion, it was originally designed to set up the shrouds and back stays to the plankshire inside the bulwarks, and to have little or nothing outside to prevent running alongside a vessel. I rebelled against this idea, first because the long masts could not be supported by so small an angle of shrouding; secondly, because in running alongside of a ship, we could not well afford to run the guns in, and if we left the muzzles sticking out two feet or more they would be entirely demoralized by the shock, unless indeed everyone was discharged at the moment of contact. I called the attention of the Naval authorities to' the very great danger of so rigging valuable ships and I went so far as to print a lot of pamphlets illustrating the folly of setting up shrouds at the plank. shire inside the bulwarks. I went to Charlestown not long after to see one of these "Canoe Ships" launched and there I met Chief Constructor Isaiah Hanscom, and seeing channels on the ship I remarked upon the fact, and he replied "we are indebted to you for that improvement." Some of you will naturally ask "In running alongside a ship what is to become of your longest yards, projecting us they do beyond the line of protection?" My answer would be brace up sharp, and if you find that does not protect your lower yards you must come to the new rig illustrated on page 7 of the pamphlet.
Gentlemen, you must consider that much of what I have said applies principally to the type of ships which we knew before the days of iron-clads and other monsters.
One word more about the Navy we ought to have; one word about coast defenses and I have done. To my notion this country can never carry out the idea of competition with European first class maritime powers; we can never want to send a Bellerophon, or any first class armored hulk to the other side of the Atlantic. I would, therefore, have floating batteries for coast and harbor defense, and revolving turrets in casemate at prominent points wherever we need large, long range rifled guns; a few of these would do more good than a big fort kept up at great cost. For the annoyance of the commerce of the enemy I would have very fast full rigged ships, mounting a few long range guns. I should calculate on running away from any ironclad, and on being fast enough to overhaul the average merchantman. These ships would cost far less than monitors and iron-clads and would make far more prizes. I would have all local military organizations on the land large enough and able enough to drive into the sea any invaders who might get into our ports, and I would so fill up all channels with torpedoes that there would be great risk in coming into any harbor. We would make peace much hater by my processes than by building any number of iron clads to be pierced by modern projectiles. A large lot of fast cruisers and floating "gun carriages," in the shape of single gun ram gun-boats would do our business at small cost and our gallant "loves" of the Annapolis Academy would have some prize money to jingle in their pockets, instead of being smothered in an iron clad. Of course I shall expect that Naval men will remark that I am only a merchant-man and had best say nothing of war matters.
Comdr. Sicard. I regard speed under sail as rather a secondary consideration in Naval boats, and am not in favor of sacrificing anything of importance to carrying a great spread. If at any time a long run is to be made it is easy to improvise auxiliary sails to suit the case. The masts and sails should fit readily in the boat without projecting into the stern sheets, and should be of a simple design easily handled in bad weather. I like the sliding gunter rig best for all boats except launches and these I think may as well be fitted with the simple sloop rig without gaff topsail. The present lines of launches and large cutters are rather too fine toward the extremities for carrying the gun comfortably, and it must be considered that in the future a shield will probably be necessary with the boat gun, and thus will be entailed an increase of weight which must be met by an increase of bearing. It is probable that during active operations in time of war we should be obliged to use steam as the motive power of our most efficient boats carrying guns. In this case, as but a small crew would be required, the gun would probably be mounted toward the middle of the boat surrounded by a sort of circular shield, the gun training over the top of its protection, or carrying the latter with it as it turns. This mode of mounting the gun gives that facility of horizontal train which is of such importance in flotilla maneuvers, when the gun must often fire in a direction quite different from the course being steered at the time. A non-recoil carriage, might be used in connection with this arrangement.
Commo. Ransom. How would you obtain an all-round fire and how could the gun be placed so as not to interfere with the machinery?
Comdr. Sicard. I have not thought out any particular plan for mounting a boat gun in the manner to which I have referred; only it is apparent that more speed and facility for horizontal train must be given to the piece when embarked, and the plan I have touched upon appears to be about the only one that will give the desired result. A good practical non-recoil carriage for howitzers has not yet been introduced. Mr. Krupp exhibited two, some eighteen months ago; one was unsatisfactory but the other performed well with a full power gun weighing about two thousand lbs. It was of course too large for boat use. A machine gun could readily be mounted in the manner indicated.
Comdr. Batcheller. I think there is but little fault to be found with the general dimensions of our boats, considering simply their length, breadth and depth, though perhaps they should all be made deeper. But with the exception of the barge and possibly one cutter for a passenger boat I think they all have too little bearing forward. Particularly is this the case with the heavier boats intended to carry boat guns. There seems to have been a tendency in building our boats to fine down the lines to beat some other boat in point of speed, and with a great disregard of other essential qualities. I quite agree with what has been said in regard to rig; that the sliding gunter is best for all but sailing launches which should be sloop rigged. I doubt the utility of any rig for steam launches and cutters. I think the dinghey the most useful of boats and would not change her in any way except to make her deeper. I think our boats the best built and the strongest for their weight that I have seen, but they lack carrying capacity, owing to want of depth and too fine lines.
Lieut. Bassett. I do not know whether these present are aware that all of the boats, except the launches, of the two training ships—the Portsmouth and the Saratoga, have been rigged with the sliding gunter. As these sailing ships make use of their boats very often, it was found that the sliding gunter rig was best, and they were so fitted this Winter at Washington.
It has occurred to me to ask why the whale boats which are, or ought to be the life boats of the ships are not fitted with air tanks, so as to make them more valuable as life boats? I once saw a whale boat Upset and the crew rescued with difficulty, where air tanks would have made the boat easy to right, or at least the men might have clung to it.
The Chairman. I think Capt. Forbes arranged a boat with india rubber sponsons. I don't know how the boats performed. Boats have for a long time been arranged with chambers, but for some reason they are not preferred on ship board. You know all ships carry Admiral Ammen's balsas at the present time, and life buoys are always attached to the stern. I have an impression that when boats have been arranged with air tanks on the end, it has helped to capsize them—if I am wrong in this, I wish to be corrected. The models have had great sheer, and the tanks would be placed very high above the Water. While I was attached to the New York yard, there was delivered a lot of "Raymond," or rather "Ingersoll" metallic life boats—they were arranged with a false bottom, and with the means of letting the water in or out. They were said to be self-righting, but I never saw one tried. I put one on each ship fitting out, but for some reason, of which I am not aware, they were not preferred. I have never heard a report from any one of them.
The first cutters should, in my opinion, (as all boats which have to carry guns,) be made of different models from the present, more stability as well as depth, and more displacement at the bows are required —they should have longer oars more like sweeps. In regard to dinghies, I would state that the Kearsarge left one at Mare Island while I was there, which gave general satisfaction to the officers. It was no longer than our boats, but deeper and fuller and being a lap-streak boat, very light, nothing but hoops for frames, yet quite strong and burdensome.
Comdr. Ames. As regards the use of india rubber sponsons, I have examined several boats of the "Massachusetts Humane Society" fitted with inflating fenders and I have found that they soon become too stiff, and almost useless, not to speak of the danger of their becoming punctured or broken. Solid cork fenders of the same dimensions are nearly as buoyant and much more practical. I strongly advise the substitution of cork for india rubber, which, by the way, has already been decided upon by the Executive Committee of the Massachusetts Humane Society. I approve of sloop rig for launches, with centre board. I made some experiments with the Resaca's launch when I was attached to that ship. It had no centre board and I saw the need of one. I think the chairman's suggestion as regards building dinghies deeper and with greater beam, a good one. At present dinghies are too small for the purposes to which they are put. I think that the only way to really find out what we need in regard to boats is to construct a full set of boats and try them under the same circumstances, and under all conditions of weather and sea. Under such experiments, carefully made, we would soon develop the proper boats for general service. Different stations require different boats, and officers are apt to make up their minds from the last cruise, as, for instance, in the Mediterranean light boats will generally answer, while in South America—at Montevideo for example—the best sea boats are necessary. Comdr. Perkins has suggested to me that in China light boats are all that are required, native boats doing all the heavy carrying, and the lighter and faster the boats are the greater satisfaction they give. These considerations cause me to think that experiments to test all points of rig, model and burden would be satisfactory and at once settle the whole question.
PACIFIC BRANCH.
U. S. S. Pensacola, Off Magdalena. Bay, April 16th, 1880.
Rear Admiral C. R. P. Rodgers, U. S. N., in the Chair.
The Chairman. I think that there is a general impression among the officers of the service that our ships' boats are the handsomest and fastest in existence but there seems to be a general distrust as to their carrying capacity and adaptation to the work which they may be called on to perform. When I commanded the Franklin I once put all the men into the boats; when full they could barely float, the water being at the time perfectly smooth, showing that had there been any sea all the men could not have been carried. In providing boats for a ship more attention should be paid to the uses for which they are intended. Almost all the boats should be heavy, and intended for carrying, rather than for speed. The necessity for making boats so that they may stow in nests no longer exists, as almost all boats are now carried on the rail and therefore can be built more nearly of a size. Every ship should have at least two regular life boats. I am in favor of wood in the construction of boats and of iron in that of ships. Chief Engineer Isherwood's very interesting report on steam launches, in my opinion, may be taken as excellent authority. I would suggest for cutters, two working lugs without booms, and a jib without bowsprit.
After some discussion it was decided to discuss the topic proposed by moans of interrogatories, which should be as follows:
I. Whether, in the opinion of those entering into the discussion, the present naval boats are what they should be; if not, what would improve them?
II. Whether the steam boat of a ship should be a launch or a smaller boat?
III. What should be the rig for launches?
IV. What should be the rig for cutters?
V. What should be the rig for gigs and whale boats?
Lieut. Meigs. I advocate full schooner rig, on the ground that it is best for expeditions away from the ship which launches may be called upon to undertake. Launches are not used as running boats, and can, therefore, be fitted with a standing rig. The schooner rig is better than that of the sloop as it does not require such lofty spars. The great trouble is that we have no recognized system of regulating the sizes of the boats supplied to vessels. There should be large boats fitted for carrying heavy loads and for life service, and lighter boats for passenger service. For mere passenger service I consider our light boats very suitable. I would suggest the use of iron in the construction of our boats, on account of its superior strength and rigidity.
Capt. Breese. I object to the use of iron, on account of too much rigidity; boats which work a little can always be pulled faster than stiffer ones. Boats of the Francis life boat type have been introduced in small numbers into the service, but have finally been rejected. If an accident were to occur to an iron boat, on detached service, it would be very difficult to repair it. With the exception of the barges, gigs, and some of the whale boats, the boats are not what they should be, the principal defect being want of capacity. With the exception of the launches all the boats are too heavily built. I consider the proper rig for launches, two working lugs without booms and a jib without bowsprit, on account of the ease with which the sails can be stowed and handled. The sails should be of light cloth with slack roping so that the greater part of the strain shall come on the canvas. This principle should apply to all boats' sails.
Lieut. Meigs. It would be fully as easy to repair an iron boat, with proper appliances, as a wooden one.
Lieut. Mason. Our boats are not adapted to the service which they have to perform except as regards speed when unloaded. For a ship of the class of the Pensacola, for instance, there should be two large sailing launches, a steam cutter, from which, at sea, the engines, boiler and screw should be removed, so that it could be used for pulling and sailing, the end of the shaft being covered by a cap and the propeller hole filled with a plank stop. In addition there should be three large cutters all of the same size; two large whale boats fitted as complete life boats, to be hoisted on the quarters; one to be used in port for the ward-room officers, the other as the Admiral's service boat; a whale-boat-gig and a cutter-barge of the same size as the other cutters; a whale boat dinghy, as suggested by Mr. Adams, and a small wherry. All boats should be fitted to a certain extent as life boats. All available spaces under bow and stern gratings and thwarts should be enclosed, making water tight tanks which might be used for stowing the lighter articles of equipment, and provisions. All boats, and especially those designated as life boats at sea, should be fitted with patent lowering and detaching apparatus. One great objection to our boats at present is the lowness of their gunwales and the use of brass swivel row locks. Masts should be clamped to the thwarts with hinge clamps, instead of being slipped through a hole as at present; this would do away with the dangerous operation of lifting the mast so high without supports. The after-clamps should be on the forward side of the thwart so that the after mast may be shipped from forward. The sliding-gunter, in my opinion, will stow quite as snugly in a boat as any other rig, and can be handled more easily in making and shortening sail. The mast is shorter than in the lug or sprit rig, and the topmast does not take up any more room than the yard of the lug or the sprit. The necessity of dipping lugs in working is obviated, as well as the difficult operation of shipping and unshipping the sprit. In large ships two steamers would be found useful especially for torpedo service, as it seems to be clearly proved by actual experience that torpedo boats should always be employed at least in pairs.
Lieut. Ingersoll. I agree with most of the ideas already expressed, but I do not consider our boats well suited for passenger boats except as regards speed. I think that a great defect is our want of life boats. Every boat should be fitted with air-tight compartments either under the seats, along the sides, or in the bow and stern. In a large regatta which was held in the European squadron the sliding-gunter rigged boats of the Franklin were victorious in every race, and all the leading boats were of that rig. Subsequently, in a general boat exercise at Cadiz, the Plymouth's boats which had been rigged slidding-gunter on the station were the first along-side of the flag ship under sail, showing the convenience of the rig. Later a race took place in which four of the Plymouth's boats came in first with their new rig.
Lieut. Adams. I think that only the launches should be fitted for guns and that the cutters should carry only men and their equipment. Each class of boats should be as nearly as possible of the same size, as the old necessity of stowing boats in nests no longer exists. In place of the dinghies now supplied small fast whale boats of about equal size should be provided, to be used for boarding, carrying despatches and other light work, and each ship should have a small boat fitted for sculls which could be stowed inside of any of the other boats. The reason that a limber boat pulls more easily is that it is impossible for all the oarsmen to give their stroke at exactly the same instant, whereas in a steamer the movement of the propelling power is uniform. I prefer sliding-gunter rig with jib in large boats, but no bowsprit.
Lieut. Garvin. I would suggest that the bowsprit should be fitted so as to be easily unshipped, to allow the use of a bow gun.
Lieut. Yates. I have found by experience that in manning and arming boats it is impossible to carry, with any chance of proper storage, the guns, equipment, stores and men, and when equipped I considered the boats unsafe in a sea way.
Lieut. Kennedy. One great objection to our service boats is that the oarsmen are too much crowded, no room being given to exert their strength in pulling, and while I advocate an increase in the size of boats, I do not advocate an increase in the number of oars.
We need only two sizes of large boats, the larger to carry a howitzer or gatling gun, and to have good carrying capacity for heavy loads, the other smaller, but still to be capable of carrying the men in case of having to leave the ship or to land the battalion. I think that a twelve-oared cutter should be a much larger boat than at present, without increasing the number of oars. Mr. Yates has referred to the trouble in carrying howitzers etc. in the launches; I have found the same trouble in carrying men and their equipment in cutters. The steam boat of a ship should be a cutter and its whole capacity should be devoted to steaming purposes, no endeavor being made to reserve space for passengers or freight; the boat being used for towing, dispatch carrying, and torpedo service.
The Chairman. I think that we should not close the discussion without saying something in regard to balsas which approach very nearly, in the purposes for which they are intended, to the subject of boats.
A general discussion on this subject took place in which the following ideas were enlarged upon. That all ships should be furnished with at least one large balsas or raft for life saving purposes, for landing men and guns, and if need be for carrying out anchors. That one or more small balsas should be provided, and kept inflated, and slung over the stern at sea ready to be lowered in case of man-overboard.
In accordance with the decision of Executive Committee, the foregoing Discussion was submitted for criticism to Rear-Admiral John Rodgers, the President, who returned it with the following remarks.
It will be conceded, without argument, that any boat for special service may be made better for that service than one designed for all work: the man-of-war's boats, except gigs and whale boats are eminently boats of all work. The gigs are made to carry the captain; the whale boats I consider specially made for safety in a seaway, and for landing through surf. Incidentally whale boats are used for all work but specially they are surf and sea boats. The launches are boats for burthen: and so indeed are the first cutters, but these must have certain speed and nimbleness not exacted from launches. It is difficult to say how much our cutters should be modified in shape, so as to get more carrying capacity. Where opposing qualities are demanded, such as speed and great carrying capacity, light draft, and lateral resistance or weatherly qualities, a compromise must be made.
In war, successful generals have attained their success by celerity of movement, appearing where not expected, throwing all their force upon a part of their enemies, and winning the battle before the slower enemy could bring up his supports. In cutting out, in boarding, in landing a detachment under fire, the slower a boat moves the more loss will be incurred before the decisive moment arrives when the enemy is to be met on equal terms, and finally overpowered by force.
As to sea-going .qualities, I think our boats with their crews would live as long as a fuller model. Some experiments have gone to establish that a boat with fine lines, when driven through the water at a good speed will make good weather longer than a bluffer bowed one. Foreign navies have deeper boats than ours. In sailing, this is an advantage, as it gives more lateral resistance, or makes them more Weatherly; but all of us have felt the inconvenience of a deep boat in grounding far from a fiat shore. The shallow boat is not less safe than a deep one, so far as the waves are concerned. The whalers make their boats very shallow and very light so as to get easily out of the way of the sea, and rise lightly out of the surf. Any model for general service must be a compromise, some qualities being left in a subordinate place, which on special occasions we shall wish had taken a more prominent one. In sailing, one will wish his boat deeper, so that she might be more weatherly. In landing on a shoal shore, or in tracking his boat for miles in surveying over a shoal, he will wish she Were flatter. Ordinary uses come in ten thousand times for a single fighting expedition. The man-of-war is a fighting machine; but also one in which the fighting crew must live and occupy themselves in all the pursuits of their calling, in which, unhappily for the advancement of the Navy, war is rarely resorted to. It scarcely seems good practice to make a use so seldom demanded the one governing consideration in boat-building for men-of-war.
The present model is a compromise arrived at from many years criticism and service, and, I think, a happy compromise. I think, however, centre-boards could be introduced to advantage in all our boats. The frame of the centre-board well to be composition metal, with the proper recesses for receiving the timbers. If the sides were of brass, soldered or riveted to the frame, it would not add greatly to the weight. The boats could then be made with less dead-rise, than now. The boats could also be made to advantage with more free board—having one, two, or three more strakes, according to size. In regard to the rigging of the boats, I have little to say. The masts should be so short as to be carried conveniently in the boat, without extending into the stern sheets more than a few inches. They should be easily stepped or taken down in something of a sea-way; the sail should be easily reduced and simple, and have its centre of effort low. It is a combination of these qualities which has made the lug so long a favorite.
On our coast it has been found that North river sloops are unfit for ocean service, because, in a sea-way, the mast is pitched overboard. To avoid this, our small vessels for sea use are schooners, with two or more masts. The schooners carry about the same amount of sail that a sloop does ; but the masts have individually so much less weight and length that they can be properly supported, which has not been proved true of sloops.
The launch is a row-boat, furnished with a full crew for rowing. The desirableness of moving independently of sails, caused the old row galleys to be used for war. The launch is a row galley; she should also carry sails; but when she fights she will in all probability follow the precedent of ages, and fight under oars. I recommend therefore for launches, as for all other boats, masts easily managed by the crew when in the boat,—to be taken down or put up at pleasure,—cruising under sail or rowing without masts, as the officer in charge may choose. In England and in the English Navy, luggers are, I believe, preferred to other rigs. The smugglers formerly used luggers as fast and weatherly; but I recommend sliding gunter masts, rather from what I hear than from preference derived out of my own experience. When a midshipman, I was officer of a gig with sliding-gunter masts, which I then thought very defective; and thus I became prejudiced; but the handiness of the rig must have improved since then. For a sail boat nothing can compare with the Chinese rig; but the masts are inconveniently long; the sails when stowed occupy too much space. In the Chinese rig, the act of lowering the sail reefs it; it has no points to tie; and making more sail is done by simply hoisting it, having no points to cast off.
John Rodgers.