PART III

â€œThe tendency of the Admiralty is to follow and not to lead other great nations. I hope that one of these days we shall not follow just a little too late.â€â€”W. E. Arnold Forster.

Probably the first occasion of recent years that mention was made of submarine boats in Parliament was subsequent to the trial of theNautilus, a diving boat invented by Messrs. Campbell and Ash, during a trial of which several exalted personages nearly lost their lives. Lord George Hamilton described the incident to the House of Commons, and created some amusement by his relation, and there is no reason to believe that the submarine was looked upon by members other than as an erratic toy to whose mercy no wise man would entrust his person.

Mr. Nordenfelt built several submarine boats, one of which was bought by the Turkish and another by the Greek Government, but though in several quarters the advisability of the Admiralty purchasing one or more Nordenfelt boats was suggested, nothing came of it.

Mr. Edmund Robertson, K.C., dealing in theNineteenth Century, of May, 1900, with the question of submarine boatsremarked that five or six years ago he knew the opinion of the technical advisers of the Admiralty, and that they did not see their way to recommend the Admiralty or the Government to make any provision for submarine vessels of war.

Since that time, however, very few weeks passed but some writer took up the cudgels on behalf of the submarine and urged the Admiralty to consider the advisability of constructing boats.

The keen interest taken in France in under-water warfare was reflected to a certain extent in this country, and on the 9th of February, 1899, Mr. Charles McLaren addressed a question to the First Lord of the Admiralty in which he referred to the â€œextraordinary valueâ€ assigned by the French minister to the new vessels, and asked â€œwhether the British Admiralty attached any importance to these experiments, or had any intention of adding any such vessels to the British Navy?â€ Viscount Goschenâ€™s answer was: â€œIt would be inexpedient at this stage for me to express the opinion of the Admiralty as to the reported performances of the new submarine boats. With reference to any action which the Board of Admiralty may take, I am not at present prepared to make any statement.â€

The position of the Admiralty in the early part of 1900 may be ascertained from an answer given by Viscount Goschen to a question put by Captain Norton on the 6th of April. â€œClose attention has been given by the Admiralty to the subject of submarine boats. The submarine boat, even if the practical difficulties attending its use can be overcome, would seem so far as the immediate future is concerned to be eventually a weapon for maritime Powers on the defensive, and it is natural that those nations which anticipate holding that position should endeavour to develop it. The question of the best way of meeting its attack is receiving much consideration, and it is in this direction that practical suggestions should be valuable. It seems certain that the reply to this weapon must belooked for in other directions than in building submarine boats ourselves, for it is clear that one submarine boat cannot fight another.â€ In the debate on the Ship-building vote the First Lord made a further statement. â€œThe importance of submarine boats had been pointed out, and it had been said that it was their duty to make experiments. The nations which were likely to have the greatest use for these boats might gain from their experiment more than others. He did not propose to make publicly any declaration as to these boats. Of course he did not wish to encourage or discourage other nations, but he must ask the Committee to excuse him going into the question.â€

In the same debate Mr. Arnold Forster, who a few months later was appointed Parliamentary and Financial Secretary to the Admiralty, made some remarks on this â€œsomewhat cryptic utterance,â€ as Mr. Robertson called it. â€œIf in the matter of submarine boats the First Lord of the Admiralty had said that in the opinion of the engineering advisers of the Admiralty to design and work a submarine boat, was so remote of accomplishment that there was no reasonable probability of being able to work it, he would have been slow to contradict him; but that was not the line taken by him. The First Lord said that the Admiralty had not designed a submarine boat, and did not propose to design one, because such a boat would be the weapon of an inferior power. But if it could be produced as a working article, the Power which possessed such an article would no longer be an inferior but a superior Power. We, above all nations, were exposed to the attacks of this engine. He submitted that it was not a satisfactory thing to stand by and allow others to carry out this problem without making some attempt to solve it for ourselves. He admitted the tendency of the Admiralty to follow and not to lead other great nations. He hoped that one of these days we should not follow just a little too late. If we had been compelled to learn our lesson with regard to ironclads, breechloaders, and armouredcruisers in the face of an active enemy we should have experienced the same lessons which the Austrian army underwent in 1866 when they were compelled to learn the merits of the breechloader by studying it on the field of battle. There was room for improvement in the attitude we had taken up in regard to submarine navigation.â€

During the short session of December, 1900, after the General Election, the Admiralty was again questioned, and the reply was that the â€œattention of the Admiralty had been called to the additional provision for submarine boats in the French naval programme, and a statement will be made when the estimates are laid before the House.â€ Between this date and the introduction of the Navy Estimates endless rumours regarding the position the Admiralty would take as to the submarine boat question found their way into the daily press. While, on the one hand, it was â€œconfidently assertedâ€ that, the Government were making secret trials with all kinds of wonderful craft, on the other hand it was stated â€œon the highest authorityâ€ that the Lords of the Admiralty had no intention of altering their minds as to the advisability of taking any action whatever in the matter.

The statement of the First Lord of the Admiralty explanatory of the Navy Estimates for 1901â€“2, published on the 1st of March, 1901, contained the following item:â€”

â€œFive submarine vessels of the type invented by Mr. Holland have been ordered, the first of which should be delivered next autumn. What the future value of these boats may be in naval warfare can only be a matter of conjecture. The experiments with these boats will assist the Admiralty in assessing their true value. The question of their employment must be studied, and all developments in their mechanism carefully watched by this country.â€

In the discussion on the Navy (Supplementary) Estimates on March 4, 1901, Mr. Flynn asked whether the policy of the Admiralty in constructing battleships â€œas to the strength ofwhich they knew nothing,â€ when other nations were turning their attention to submarine vessels, was quite wise. This same notion as to the advisability of going in for small submarines instead of big battleships is to be found in a speech by Mr. Oâ€™Shee on March 23rd, who said that if these boats were able to do half what was claimed for them, then the present gigantic expenditure for naval construction was entirely uncalled for. A submarine boat could be built for Â£25,000, and manned by ten men, and if it were true they were able to combat the big ships which the Government were building, those ships would be absolutely useless except for carrying the submarine boats to places where they were to work. If submarines were all that was claimed for them it would render unnecessary the Â£9,000,000 which was then being expended on new battleships.

Mr. Arnold Forster in the House on March 18, 1901, said:â€”

â€œI will not say much about submarine vessels, but I will say that I am glad that the Admiralty, under the advice of Lord Goschen, took the view that it was wise not to be found unprepared in regard to this matter. We have a great amount of information about these boats, but we do not attach an exaggerated value to it. But we believe that an ounce of practice is worth a ton of theory, and that when we get officers and men to see these boats, they will learn more from them than from many reports which come from foreign countries. One thing stands between the submarine boat and efficiency, and that is the motor by which it is propelled. But there is no disguising the fact that if you can add speed to the other qualities of the submarine boat, it might in certain circumstances become a very formidable vessel. We are comforted by the judgment of the United States and Germany, which is hostile to these inventions, which I confess I desire shall never prosper.â€”(Commander Young, M.P., said that if the Admiralty built any submarine boats, all he would ask would be that he might not be ordered to serve on one.)â€”Butwe cannot regard our position as the same as that of other nations. The United States to-morrow, if a perfect submarine were invented, would not only have more secure protection for their harbours. In Germany the harbours are no doubt carefully protected now. But we live in the narrow waters of the Channel, and our problem is not precisely that of any other nation, and I am glad that Lord Goschen did give this instruction to the Board which has now borne fruit in the determination to put this experiment into execution, and we shall see the result of it during the next financial year.â€

Mr. Edmund Robertson, K.C., in the debate on the Navy Estimates on March 21, 1901, remarked that as the building of the submarine boats was only a matter of experiment, he thought it might have been introduced upon a somewhat smaller scale. If its value was purely conjectural, he should have said that one boat would have been enough to experiment with. Two should have been quite enough, but we generally did things on a large scale, and after having refused to say one word for many years about submarine boats, we now found the Admiralty launching out into quite a little fleet of them. â€œWhat,â€ asked Mr. Robertson, â€œhad become of the control of the House of Commons? What had become of that control when the Admiralty of the day, having refused to tell them their policy, come forward shortly afterwards and say they will build five of these boats?â€ He could not help protesting against this, for a new departure of this nature ought not to have been made except with the sanction of the House, and at the very least it ought not to have been done without being divulged to the House.

It may be noted that Mr. Arnold Forster, speaking in the House of Commons in January, 1902, explained that when the decision to construct submarine boats was arrived at, only one type was available for purchase, that the right to build boats of this type was in the hands of one firm, and that it was therefore necessary to entrust the work to that firm.

The first British Submarines.â€”The first five British submarines are almost identically the same as the six Holland boats ordered by the U.S. Congress on June 7, 1900.

They are cigar-shaped vessels 63 feet 4 inches long; beam, 11 feet 9 inches; and displacement submerged, 120 tons. The plating and frames are of steel and of sufficient size and thickness to withstand the pressure of depths not exceeding 100 feet. The bulkheads are located to provide safety in event of collision, and to stiffen the hull as a whole; decks are provided throughout the whole length of the interior of the vessel, combined with beams and floors to carry the weight of machinery; the tanks are of steel, and they are braced, stiffened, rivetted, and caulked absolutely tight, and man-holes are located to allow access to the interior of all tanks.

When the vessel is in light condition for surface running, an above-water deck, 31 feet long, is available, and there are means of stowing anchor and lines and of affording mooring facilities to the vessel. Rudders of steel plates are provided, and they are supported by skegs at the stern of the vessel. The conning tower is of armoured steel; its outside diameter is 32 inches, and its minimum thickness 4 inches; it is provided with ports for observation by the steersman. In the construction of the vessel care has been taken that all portions of the exterior of the hull shall be free from projections of a kind that might be entangled by ropes or other obstacles when submerged, and the lines of the vessels have been designed so that there shall be a minimum of resistance when it is running at the surface.

Propulsion.â€”On the surface the vessel is propelled by a 160 h.p., single screw, four-cylinder, Otto gasoline engine, capable of giving a speed of 8 knots, while when submerged it is driven through the water by a 70 h.p. electric waterproof motor giving a speed of 7 knots. The radius of action at the surface is about 400 knots, while the storage batteries have sufficient capacity for a speed of 7 knots on a four hoursâ€™submerged run. Gearing is provided for the charging of the batteries by using the motor as a dynamo, and running it from the gasoline engine when at the surface, and from connecting the propeller either to the engine or the motor; these operations are effected through clutches. Switchboards and switches are provided for the safe and efficient distribution of the electric current throughout the vessel. The lighting system consists of portable incandescent electric lamps, together with several ports and openings in the hull to admit the outside light. The hull is circular, in cross sections, and is divided by the watertight bulkheads into three separate compartments. There is also a thorough subdivision of the bottom and every precaution is taken to localise any injury to the hull which might threaten the buoyancy.

In the forward compartment is one torpedo expulsion tube, located at the extreme forward end of the vessel, opening outward two feet below the light water-line. The tube is placed with its muzzle in the nose of the craft and its axis inclined somewhat to the longitudinal axis of the vessel. The muzzle of the tube is closed by a watertight door, and this can be lifted from within for the discharge of the five Whitehead torpedoes, each 11 feet 8 inches long, which are carried in the interior. One torpedo is placed in the tube, and the other four are placed side by side above the storage batteries. When the first torpedo is fired a sufficient amount of water to compensate for the loss of weight is automatically and almost instantaneously admitted into the tube, causing only a slight change of time for a few seconds. Such compensation is necessary, as the submarine boat is lighter than the amount of water it displaces and any alteration in its weight tends to send it up to the surface or down towards the bottom. When the second torpedo is placed in the tube the water is run into a special torpedo compensating tank; of these tanks there are four, and they are filled as each torpedo is fired. When the last torpedo has been ejected the expulsion tube is filled with water and is kept thus until the end of the run.

Besides the torpedo tube there is in the forward compartment a series of air flasks, a gasoline tank of 850 gallons capacity, and a trimming tank.

The central compartment contains in its double bottom the main ballast tanks and a circular compensating tank placed between the two sets of batteries. Above the double bottom and below the axis of the vessel are located the storage batteries, and above these are carried the four torpedoes, which are 45 centimetres in diameter and 11 feet 8 inches in length. In the same compartment are a series of air flasks in which air at 2,000 lbs. to the square inch pressure is stored for the purpose of keeping pure the living spaces of the crew.[9]

9. Also for firing the torpedoes and for blowing the water out of the ballast tanks when it is desired to navigate as a surface boat.

In the rear compartment is the four-cylinder gasoline engine, which is rated at from 160 to 190 actual horse-power, and at from 320 to 390 revolutions per minute. Its net weight is 1,300 lbs., its length over all is 9 feet 7 inches, and its total height above the crank-shaft centre is 5 feet 6 inches. In these engines, which gave satisfaction in the first Holland boat, the distribution of the cranks and the timing of the valves and igniters are so arranged that the operations in the four-cylinders alternate, so that while one is at the expansion stroke the other three are at the suction, compression, and exhaust strokes respectively. By this arrangement the engine is perfectly balanced and vibration is reduced to a minimum.

Submersion.â€”The first operation to be performed when it is desired to submerge the vessel is the admission of water into her ballast tanks. When these are full she runs â€œawashâ€ with her conning tower alone above the waves.

In order to completely submerge the boat she is steered below the surface by means of her pair of horizontal rudders at the stern. When at the required depth (normally from 20 to 30 feet) she is brought up on an even keel by theinclination of the horizontal rudders, which may be controlled automatically (by some such arrangement as is found in the Whitehead torpedo) or by hand. All modern submarine craft go under at an angle, and are steered below the waves by rudders: the principle of submersion on an even keel by down-haul propellers, advocated by Mr. Nordenfelt, has been abandoned by all latter-day designers, as has also the submersion of the drawing in of cylinders adopted in the Campbell-Ash boat.

When running submerged the submarine is lighter than her displacement, and is only kept under by her horizontal rudders, which, of course, only act when she is moving.

The great drawback to all under-water craft has been their lack of longitudinal stability, for they have a tendency to rise or sink at the slightest provocation. In our account of the Nordenfelt boats this disagreeable quality is illustrated. In order to keep the vessel at a regular depth recourse must be had to the horizontal rudders and to the two trimming tanks and the one circular compensating tank carried.

In a general way it will probably be found possible to keep the boat on an even keel by means of her rudders, but if she shows any decided tendency either to dive to the bottom or to rise to the surface or to heel over to one side water may be admitted into the above-mentioned tanks, and the admission may be effected either automatically or by hand. A hydrostatic valve will prevent the vessel passing the safe limit of depth.

Air Supply and Ventilation.â€”Compressed air is stored aboard the vessel with means of allowing a supply of air into the interior of the vessel. Ventilators are provided for the circulation of outside air throughout the vessel; the gasoline vapours from the engines and all noxious gases are carefully excluded by suitable devices, while safety valves are provided to prevent the pressure to the vessel from exceeding that of the atmosphere.

Pumps and Pumping.â€”All tanks and compartments are connected with the pumps, the valves are located to allow of quick manipulation, and pumps with independent means of operation are furnished in duplicate. The tanks can also be emptied by flowing out.

Navigating Apparatus.â€”In communication with the interior of the vessel there are bells and speaking tubes, while there are provided gauges, indices, and clinometers for indicating pressure, depth, positions, quantities, and weights.

Two compasses are carried, each compensated and adjusted. It is said that the first of the British submarines exhibited certain defects in its compasses, which it was thought were due to the steel conning tower. This was replaced by a brass construction, and on being tested the compasses acted more satisfactorily. After a few trials a new steering-wheel was fixed in the boat close to the conning tower, which could be worked from above and below alike.

The first British submarine was launched on November 2, 1901, at Barrow without any ceremony, although representatives of the Admiralty were present. The trials were placed under the direction of Captain R. H. S. Bacon, D.S.O.

Before launching â€œNo. 1â€ was by means of a floating dock placed on the gridiron. A crew of six men were put on board, and she was then hermetically sealed for three hours, air being supplied by compressed air cylinders. The trial was quite successful, and the men suffered no inconvenience. On her first â€œsea trialâ€ â€œNo. 1â€ started from the floating dock and proceeded along the Devonshire and Buccleuch docks and back to her moorings. On subsequent trials she attained a surface speed of 10 knots.

The first submersion trials of â€œNo. 1â€ were carried out on February 5, 1902. She went under water with some officers of theHazardt.g.b., the mother ship to the submarines (Captain R. H. S. Bacon, D.S.O.) on board, and most satisfactory results were obtained. Her appliances for thepurification of the air were used to maintain atmospheric conditions without any need of her cylinders of compressed air being requisitioned. The first deep sea trials of â€œNo. 1â€ took place at the beginning of April last in the Irish Sea. The submerging was accomplished in less than six seconds. From the â€œawashâ€ conditions she suddenly disappeared and then came again into sight some yardsâ€™ distant with great rapidity and ease, and the diving was continued at intervals for several hours at a time without any perceptible hitch.[10]

10. Mr. Arnold Foster, in the House of Commons on May 29, 1902, said that the submarines had been a pronounced success, performing all that could be expected from them in the way of evolution and manÅ“uvring.

Submarine â€œNo. 2â€ was launched on February 21, 1902. Certain alterations were made in her construction, rendered advisable by defects which had been discovered during the testing of â€œNo. 1.â€ â€œNo. 3â€ took the water on May 9th, and â€œNo. 4â€ on May 23 last.

During April last No. 42 t.b. was commissioned at Portsmouth as tender to theHazardt.g.b., and was sent to Barrow for a series of experiments with the submarines.

The Navy Estimates for 1902â€“1903 provided for four further submarines, which Mr. Arnold Forster said would be an improvement on those already constructed at Barrow. The Admiralty, he added, proposed to continue the process of adding submarines to our fleet. Details of the new boats are not obtainable.

APPENDIX IITHE AMERICAN SUBMARINES

â€œThe Submarine Boat is a small ship on the model of the Whitehead, subject to none of its limitations, improving on all its special qualities, excepting speed, for which it substitutes incomparably greater endurance. It is not, like other small vessels, compelled to select for its antagonist a vessel of about its own or inferior power; the larger and more powerful its mark the better its opportunity.â€â€”Mr.J. P. Holland.

â€œIn my judgment, as a constructor of these boats (the new Hollands for the United States Government), and from my long experience in designing and constructing war vessels for the Government, and as the constructor of the originalHolland, I have no doubt whatever of the endurance, habitability, durability, and reliability of these boats.

â€œNo type of boat in the navy has received such crucial tests as theHolland. The submarine boat to-day is further advanced in its development than any type of naval vessels that I am aware of. I desire to say that in my opinion theHolland, without any improvements, is to-day the greatest vessel for harbour and coast defence ever known.â€â€”Mr.Lewis Nixon, builder of theHolland.

When the British Admiralty decided to experiment with submarine boats, the type chosen was that invented by Mr. John P. Holland. It is therefore fitting that some account should be given of the various stages through which the Holland boat has gone in the course of its evolution.

Although Mr. John P. Holland, of Paterson, New Jersey,U.S.A., made a number of experiments in the sixties, his first real submarine boat was not built until 1875.

Holland No. 1may be described as an under-water canoe, for there was only room for one occupant, who propelled the vessel along by means of pedal-acting mechanism, a small screw being fitted at the stern.

The dimensions were:â€”

MR. HOLLANDâ€™S EARLIEST SUBMARINE.(1875.)

It was divided into three parts; the two end ones were used as air reservoirs and submersion tanks, and that in the centre contained the operator, whose head was encased in a diverâ€™s helmet. The vessel was driven by a small propeller projecting from the stern joist, and beneath this was the rudder.

Holland No. 2was constructed in 1877 at the Albany City Iron Works of New York.

Its dimensions were:â€”

It had a double shell, and in the space between water ballast could be admitted for submersion. The motor was a petroleum engine of 4 h.p., working a screw at the stern. Two rudders, one vertical, the other horizontal, were carried, and experiments showed that the latter acted better when placed at the stern than when on the side. After a series of trials on the Passaic River, Mr. Holland removed themachinery and sank his boat under Falls Bridge at Patterson, where it probably remains at this day.

Holland No. 3was commenced in 1879 in the yards of the Delamater Iron Company of New York City, and finished in 1881.

Its dimensions were:â€”

It was propelled by a 15 h.p. petroleum engine of the Brayton type; as armament a submarine cannon, 11 feet long and 9 inches in diameter, was carried, and the projectile was expelled by means of a charge of compressed air. â€œShe was the first submarine since Bushnellâ€™s time,â€ writes Admiral Hichborn, â€œemploying water ballast and always retaining buoyancy, in which provision was made to ensure a fixed centre of gravity and a fixed absolute weight. Moreover, she was the first buoyant submarine to be steered down and up inclines in the vertical plane by horizontal rudder action, as she was pushed forward by her motor, instead of being pushed up and down by vertically acting mechanism. Her petroleum engine, provided for motive power and for charging her compressed air flasks, was inefficient, and the boat therefore failed as a practical craft; but in her were demonstrated all the chief principles of successful brain-directed submarine navigation. After the completion of the boat, Holland led the world far and away in the solution of submarine problems, and for a couple of years demonstrated that he could perfectly control his craft in the vertical plane. Eventually, through financial complications, she was taken to New Haven, where she now is.â€ In 1896 her air-compressor was removed to work a forge, and she is now nothing but an empty hull.

Holland No. 4was constructed in the yard of Gammon and Cooper, of Jersey City. It was simply meant as a model, being only 16 ft. 4 in. long, 28 in. in diameter, and displacing a ton. The motor was an explosive engine, which was to serve for propulsion above and below the surface. The life of this model was unfortunately short, for on one occasion she was submerged with her cupola open, with the result that the water entered and she sank.

Holland No. 5, commonly known under the name of the â€œZalinsky Boat,â€ owing to its dynamite guns, was built at Fort Lafayette.

It wasâ€”

30 feet long,7 feet beam,7 feet in diameter,

30 feet long,

7 feet beam,

7 feet in diameter,

and was armed with two Zalinsky pneumatic dynamite guns. Owing to an error in construction, she was shipwrecked on the rocks, but was afterwards rescued and used for some experiments in the docks.

Holland No. 6never got further than the design stage; it was not a true submarine, not being capable of total submergence.

Holland No. 7was known as thePlunger.

BOW VIEW OF THE â€œHOLLAND.â€

Whilst Mr. Whitney was Secretary of the Navy he was anxious to provide some kind of protection against gun-fire for torpedo-boats, and under suggestion he invited proposals for submarine boats. A great many designs were sent in, and two propositions to build were made by the famous Cramp firm, the designs being those of Holland and Nordenfelt. It will not be necessary to enter into any detailed comparison between the two types. Suffice it to say that while Mr. Nordenfelt screwed his boat down by using vertical screws, and held the opinion that the keel of a submarine must always be kept parallel to the surface of the water, Mr. Holland steered his boat down and up an incline by the action of horizontal rudders placed in the stern. The Holland design was accepted, because â€œit embodied the ideas of a fixed centre of gravity, of an exact compensation for expended weights, of a low longitudinal metacentric height, and of quick diving and rising by the effort of the propeller pushing the vessel against the resistance of her midship section only down and up inclines, the angles of which were to be determined by horizontal rudder action.â€ Difficulties in regard to guarantees of performance prevented the closing of a contract that yearâ€”1888â€”and the next year, after all preliminaries were arranged, a change in administration caused the matter to be put aside. After the lapse of some years interest in submarine boats was again aroused, and on March 3rd, 1893, Congress authorised the building of a single experimental vessel, and after a third competition of designs and other delays a contract for a Holland boat was signed two years later with the Holland Torpedo-boat Company (formed in 1895). The new vessel was to be called thePlunger. The long delay was owing,Mr. Holland has said, to the opposition of a few officers of Conservative spirit, who preferred to see the value of submarine boats fully established by their employment in other navies, and their place in schemes of attack and defence properly located before they could recommend their adoption in their own navy.

The dimensions of thePlungerare as follows:â€”

Although thePlungerwas actually launched on the 7th of August, 1897, she was never completed, although for three years various alterations were carried out. The steam engines were removed and were replaced by oil motors, but by the time these modifications had been effected the Holland Torpedo-boat Company came to the conclusion that thePlunger, when completed according to the terms of the contract, would be so inferior to the more modernHollandsthat they offered to refund the Government all it had paid them upon thePlunger, and all expenses connected with the contract, provided the Navy Department would enter into a contract for a newHolland. The proposition was accepted, and the money, some $94,000 odd, was accordingly refunded. A short time ago it was announced that thePlungerwas being broken up.

Holland No. 8resembled very much the later types, but as she was not entirely satisfactory,Holland No. 9was built. This latter vessel is generally referred to as theHolland. She was the prototype of the British submarines, and her performances have excited a vast deal of interest all over the civilised world.

The dimensions of theHolland, which was constructed at Elizabeth Port, New Jersey, by Mr. Lewis Nixon, at the expense of the Holland Company, and whilst the alterations to thePlungerwere still in progress, are as follows:â€”

On the surface the motor is a gasoline engine of the Otto type of 50 h.p., giving a speed of about 7 knots an hour, and under water an electric motor, capable of giving 50 h.p. for 6 hours or 150 h.p. for 2 hours, is used. The battery of accumulators consists of 66 cells, giving 350 amperes for 4 hours, and allowing a speed of 8 knots an hour. The radius of action on the surface is 1,500 miles at 7 knots without a renewal of gasoline, and it can go 50 knots under water without coming to the surface. In order to dive water ballast is admitted until the boat is flush with the water, and it is then steered down an incline by her two horizontal rudders at the stern, carried in addition to the ordinary vertical rudder. It has a reserve buoyancy which tends to bring it to the surface in case of accident. It can dive to a depth of 28 feet in 8 seconds. The armament was intended originally to consist of three tubesâ€”two at the bows and one at the stern;two were to throw aerial torpedoes and shells, while the third was to discharge Whitehead torpedoes. The submarine gun aft, which was worked by pneumatic power, and was capable of throwing 80 lbs. of dynamite a distance of about half a mile, was, however, abandoned. The aerial gun at the bows is 11Â·25 ft. long and 8 in. in diameter, and each of the projectiles weighs 222 lbs., and carries 100 lbs. of gun-cotton. This gun can shoot these projectiles a distance of one mile. The torpedo tube is 18 in., and three torpedoes are carried; they have a running capacity of more than half a mile at a speed of 30 knots. On the top of the boat a flat superstructure is built to afford a walking platform, and underneath this are spaces for exhaust pipes, and for the external outfit of the boat, such as ropes and a small anchor. From the centre of the boat a turret extends upward through the superstructure about 18 inches. It is about 2 feet in diameter, and is the only means of entrance to the boat; it is also the place from which the boat is operated.

As Mr. Holland had been experimenting with submarine craft for 25 years, and as he now considered that he had secured a practical result, and that his newest boat would do all that he claimed, he requested the United States Admiralty to make a series of exhaustive trials with theHolland. These trials accordingly took place, and having been found to be satisfactory, theHollandwas purchased by the U.S. Government on April 11, 1900. The price paid was $150,000, and the Company stated that the vessel had cost them, exclusive of any office expenses, or salaries of officers, $236,615,427. TheHollandwas formally placed in commission under the command of Lieut. Harry H. Caldwell, U.S.N., on October 13, 1900, but the boat had been under the charge of this officer since June 25, 1900.

An Act making appropriations for the Naval Service for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1901, which was approved on June 7, 1900, contained the following item:â€”

â€œThe Secretary of the Navy is hereby authorised and directed to contract for five submarine torpedo boats of theHollandtype, of the most improved design, at a price not to exceed one hundred and seventy thousand dollars each:Provided, That such boats shall be similar in dimensions to the proposed newHolland, plans and specifications of which were submitted to the Navy Department by the Holland Torpedo-boat Company, November twenty-third, eighteen hundred and ninety-nine. The said new contract and the submarine torpedo-boats covered by the same are to be in accordance with the stipulations of the contract of purchase made April eleventh, nineteen hundred, by and between the Holland Torpedo-boat Company, represented by the secretary of the said company, the party of the first part, and the United States, represented by the Secretary of the Navy, the party of the second part. Towards the completion of the equipment, outfit of the new vessels heretofore authorised 400,000 dollars.â€

A contract for the construction ofsix(not five) submarine torpedo-boats, Nos. 3â€“8, was finally concluded on the 25th of August, 1900, between the Holland Torpedo-boat Company and the Secretary of the United States Navy.

Their names are as follows:â€”

These four were to be constructed in the yards of Lewis Nixon, at Elizabethport, New Jersey.

These were to be built at the Union Iron Works, San Francisco.

As the specification for these six boats resembles in almost every particular that for the five British submarines of theHollandtype, details need not be given here.

The contract price of the hull and machinery of each boat was $34,000.

The first of the six submarine boats ordered from the Holland Company by the United States Government, to be launched was theAdder, the launching ceremony being performed by Mrs. E. B. Frost, wife of the Secretary of the Holland Company.

ThePorpoise,Moccassin, andSharkwere all launched in 1901; at the time of writing theGrampusand thePikewere still on the stocks.[11]

11. The Naval Committee of the United States Senate in June, 1902, amended the Appropriation Bill, and provided for the purchase of five further submarines of the latestHollandtype, and for investigation into other types.

The â€œFulton.â€

TheFultonis an exact duplicate of the six boats the Holland Torpedo-boat Company have built for the United States. She has been built at the expense of the company with the object of experimenting, to see if it is possible to get smaller engines with less weight and greater power.

Mr. Holland said that he could not build his boats any longer and could not get any more speed, simply for the reason that he could not get engines with enough power. It was his intention to subject every part of the equipment and motive power of theFultonto thorough test, and to incorporate the experience thus gained in the six Government boats.

TheFultonwas launched on June 2, 1901, from the yards of Lewis Nixon.

In the autumn of last year the vessel, with seven officers and men on board, remained for fifteen hours at the bottom of Peconie Bay, whilst a bad storm was raging above, without having the air in the interior renewed. The turret-hatch was closed at seven oâ€™clock on November 23rd, and at the expiration of fifteen hours it had not been found necessary to draw off any of the compressed air contained in the four flaskstaken down with the boat. The atmosphere was said to be as pure as in the cabin of an ordinary yacht. A glass of water filled to the brim stood on the cabin table during all the time of submersion, and not a drop was spilled in spite of the gale blowing above water. The new submarines of theFultontype carry 59 cubic feet of air compressed by a pressure of 2,000 pounds to the square inch. With the supply to fall back on, Captain Cable said that six men could probably live in theFultonfor something like eight months. It was, according to him, more a matter of food than air.

STERN VIEW OF THE â€œHOLLAND.â€

In December, 1901, theFultongave an exhibition for the benefit of the Norwegian naval officers who were deputed to inquire into the capabilities of the Holland boats. Whilst travelling under water it discharged dummy torpedoes at targets with perfect accuracy, and dived repeatedly once in three seconds, or quickly enough to dodge a shell aimed at it.Commander Geelmuyden, who was aboard, said that when he inspected theHollandit was quite incapable of theFultonâ€™sperformances. There is indeed little doubt that the newestHollandboats represent all that is newest and best in submarine boat construction.

She does not, however, appear to be perfect in every particular. On Monday, April 28, 1902, theFultonleft New York for Washington, convoyed by the steamerNorfolk. Her course was to have been to Hampton Roads, up Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac River to the Federal capital, where she was expected to arrive on the Saturday following her departure. She had on board, besides stored electricity for her submarine trials, 750 gallons of gasoline for surface propulsion. She put in at Delaware Breakwater on Monday morning, and shortly afterwards an explosion occurred. Lieutenant Oscar Kohen, of the Austrian Navy, who was on board at the time, was severely bruised, while a lieutenant of the American Navy and several others were injured. The boat itself was not seriously damaged. It transpired that the accident was due to a slight explosion of hydrogen gas caused by the spilling of the acid from the batteries. It was stated that during the trial the engine ran twenty hours in a very heavy sea without stopping, and the speed of the boat averaged 8710knots, and behaved extremely well.

The Holland Torpedo-boat Company intended, so it is stated, to build a couple of boats to go to the lakes and to be carried on battleships. Mr. Lewis Nixon, the builder of theHolland, said recently that Congress should provide one submarine boat at least for every battleship and cruiser small enough to be swung by a derrick, and lowered into the water before going into action. He remarked that it was perfectly feasible to design a successful submarine boat for such service. Admiral Dewey had said that big vessels could be fitted to carry diving torpedo-boats, and that special transport steamers would be the best for this purpose.

Back to Index Next