On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
More Light ou the Smokeless Powder Question. To the Editor of the Scientific American : The Scientific American of May 6 contains a letter from E. J. Ryves, of London, England, relative to the recent wrecking of a 10-inch gun at Sandy Hook. The tenor of this communication is to the effect that this deplorable accident is directly chargeable to inherent faults of multi-perforated powder. This attack upon a brilliant solution of the smokeless powder problem involves insinuations and charges that I cannot allow to pass by in silence. Those who are acquainted with the relations of the Maxim brothers have already read between the lines of Hiram Maxim'sI should say Mr. Ryves'Ietter. But the vast majority of your readers are ignorant of this fraternal warfare, and I crave your permis.sion to place before them in the columnss of your paper some facts that may convince them that our ordnance officers, though unprogressive, are not yet fit subjects for the attention of alienists, and that all knowledge did not desert this country when the plans of a certain machine gun crossed the Atlantic. My claims for consideration in this matter rest with the fact that I aeted as assistant in the experiments of Dr. SchUpphaus and Hudson Maxim and as superintendent of the company formed for the commercial utilization of the results of those experiments, which covered very fully the field of smokeless powder. As the inference from the letter in question and an article in the Scientific American Supplement for May 6 inspired by Hiram Maxim is that the SchUpphaus-Maxim powder was founded upon the early work of that gentleman, it will be necessary to add some more secret history. Hudson Maxim had undertaken to develop a smokeless powder torpedo gun system. Mr. Maxim associated with himself Dr. Robert C. SchUpphaus. To produce a progressive powder, Mr. Maxim had in view a tubular powder, with a thin non-combustible or slowly burning cover. Practical difficulties made us discard the idea. Recalling Capt. Rodman's work with multi-perforated cakes of black powder, multi-perforated grains without covering were adopted, since mathematics showed that such grains could be made to approximate the theoretical advantages of a covered tubular powder with regard to an increasing burning surface. But no smokeless powder formula of the day was suitable for the production of a satisfactory multi-perforated powder. New lines entirely had to be pursued. While Mr. Maxim gave his attekition to dies and torpedo guns, Dr. SchUpphaus busied himself with this problem with the most happy results, discovering a suitable formula, capable of wide variations to meet all intelligent views, and a process for manufacturing commercially that formula into a perfect multi-perforated grain. Later I brought out the "segmental grain," relating to the most advantageous shape of the perforations, for which patents have been granted me in the United States and Germany. This history will dispose of the implication that the SchUpphaus-Maxim powder .may be tntced to Hiram Maxim through Hudson Maxim's eai-ly connections' with his brother. If Hiram Maxim would but publish the retraction he made to Mr. Vick-ers of his firm concerning this point, his understudies might be more guarded in their statements. A word in regard to Dr. Schtipphaus will not be out of place, for he is a pioneer in the American smokeless powder field. 'Vhen smokeless powders began to make a stir in America, his investigations were turned in that direction, with the resiult that in 1890 he submitted several powders to the Uiiited States government. For the 030 caliber gun, then in its experimental stage, two forms of guncottoii powders were offered, representing ideas that have not been improved upon to this day. But the ignition of these with the primers in use proviiig very unsatisfactory, and the cry being for the high ballistics inherent in the nitroglycerin powders, he produced such a powder that gave superior results in the 080 caliber rifle. He then took the ordnance office by surprise in presenting samples of this powder for the 8-inch rifle. Satisfactory results were obtained, but to no avail. Rip Van Winkle of the Ordnance Department turned in for another sleep, with the result that utter consternation ruled throughout the department when the adoption of the Krag-Jorgensen rifle brought the realization that they had uo American powder even in sight for it, since the early inventors had retired permanently in disgust from the field of small-arms powder. It was certainly premature upon the part of Dr. SchUpphaus to poke Rip Van Winkle, of the Ordnance Department. in the ribs five years ahead of any other American inventor and say, "Wake up, old man, and try to catch up with Europe; here is some smokeless powder for a large rifle." When Dr. SchUpphaus took up the powder question some years later with Hudson Maxim, the erosive qualities of high grade nitroglycerin powders had been recognized, and the demand was for guncotton powders, with higher ballistic properties than they then possessed. Mr. Ryves' discovery that multi-perforating is not advantageous, but dangerous, is novel. The Ordnance Department of the United States Army has never been accused of jumping to conclusions. After three years' experience it announced very firmly that multi-perforated powder was to be credited with all the advantages that had been claimed for it. Powder was supplied for all the guns of the United States Army, and duplicated in part of them many times. What excited particular comment, outside of the powder's high ballistic and low erosive value, was its remarkable reliability and regularity. However, Mr. Ryves has made tests. The trouble with those experiments is that they were comparative ones. The experienced engineer will always go shy of such tests. The comparative test deals with relatives, and generally omits some essential condition. It had been attempted to manufacture multi-perforated cordite, with no success at all. There was a quasi-peace between the Maxim brothers then, and they were working together, for the introduction of multi-perforated powder into England. Hiram proposed, however, that some credit should go to him, and so walked the cordite formula onto the scene. But flat failure followed. Whatever is added, vaseline or castor oil, is put in for the simple purpose of keeping the larger rods from warping and checking badly. It does not succeed any too well with plain rods and is utterly out of the question with the intricate forms of multi-perforated grains. Then transversely perforated rods were tried. Cordite being too brittle for being punched into, some rods of Chilworth powder were secured and perforated transversely, it having a rubbery consistency. Theoretically, I cannot figure out any particular advantage in transversely perforating the usual long solid rods to which the process must be applied. The rod of circular section employed in England was a very poor form additionally for the purpose. It is probable that the Chilworth powder was just right for the gun. This was perforated with sapient wisdom in a manner that rendered it a quicker powder for that gun, and that meant a lowering of ballistics obtainable with it. That the perforated powder gave equal ballistics with the unperforated is explainable by the fact that the perforations were such as but to quicken the powder to a degree that the slight advantages of transverse perforations could counterbalance. Furthermore tiiere could exist doubts as to the action of such transversely perforated rods in a gun where experience and theory both dictated that the short longitudinally perforated grain offered especial advantages for regularity of action. Mr. Ryves' witnessed some loosely conducted experiments of a system never tried before, and would damn something else by it. He may have fired more rounds of ammunition than most men alive, but inhalation of powder gases has never been classified hy the medicinal profession as a brain tonic. No powder was sent to England at that time on account of troubles in the company. But it had been distinctly understood that we would not guarantee our powder to pa.ss the English heat test. While the United States was conning its smokeless powder primer, prudence did not dictate the building of a costly guncotton plant, and that article was purchased in the American market. It was the best to be had, but not up to the English standard, and it is manifest that a powder cannot be more stable than its ingredients. The implication that the process hurt the stability of the ingredients is best answered by the fact that the SchUpphaus-Maxiiu powder led American powders in that regard and contributed largely to the raising of the American heat test that then existed. Then again the powder is damned because it contains di-nitrocellulose. There must be many fools in the business, then, since the Russian, German, F'rench, and American powders for large rifles contain that article by intention. Even cordite has some that is always produced in the manufacture of military guncotton. The only powder that made use of military guncotton from which the soluble cotton had been specially extracted has a nice headstone in the powder graveyard. The truth of the matter is that di-nitrocellulose is a generic term comprising a large number of varieties of nitrocellulose, many of which are eminently suitable for use in smokeless powders. Basing an opinion upon experience derived by my connection with the development and manufacture of multi-perforated smokeless powder, and upon such information concerning the trend of commercial production of powder in this country during the last year or so that has reached me, I do not hold with any explanations that have been publicly advanced. That placing it upon the multi-perforated feature seems to me to border upon the nonsensical, for it is reason that an inherent defect should have put itself in evidence during three years of trials. The same thing was alleged of brown prismatic powder with its central hole to account for abnormal pressures occasionally encountered. But Vieille showed that such pressures arose from wave action in the powder gases induced by certain conditions of loading. When these conditions were avoided In practice, abnormal pressures disappeared. My opinion would involve responsibilities that I do not care to assume in absence of direct proof of any cause. In addition, I know that a most eminent authority in Europe, with a wide experience in powder matters covering many years, has stated firmly that any smokeless powder may detonate in a gun under certain conditions. What those circumstances are I do not know, since the man in question vouchsafed only the general statement. The report of the board investigating the accident will be a basis for the advancement of ideas by those who may not agree with the conclusions. Fred. H. McGahie, M.E. 580 Henry Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. Japanese Clock. To the Editor of the Scientific American : In your issue of May 6 is an illustrated article about a Japanese clock in which mention might be made of some interesting facts pertaining to Japanese horology. The Japanese divide the twenty-four hours into twelve periods of time, of which six belong to the night, and six to the day, their day beginning at sunrise and ending at sunset. Whether the day or night be long or short, there are always six periods in each. To attain this the characters or numerals on the scale are adjustable, two of them are set, one to agree with sunrise, the other with sunset, and the four characters between them divide the space into equal portions. Thus, when the period of daylight is longer than the night, the day hours will be proportionately longer than those of night. Another peculiarity in their scale is, that they only use six characters, those from four to nine, and these read back ward. The scale on your clock is numbered consecutively or 6, 5, 4, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 9, 8, 7, 7 Why these are so arranged from top to bottom I should like to know. The United States National Museum has a clock like the one you illustrate. It also has a Chinese watch with adjustable figures on the dial that are placed in the same order as those on the clock scale. E. H. Hawley. Smithsonian Institution, United States National Museum. The Speed of Warships. To the Editor of the Scientific American: I have read with much interest the several articles on the various foreign navies, and note the widespread popularity which they, as well as the Naval and Coast Defense Supplements, have gained. A discussion of the various navies, also of the different types of vessels contained therein, proves to be an unusually interesting subject at the present time, and I am pleased to note that the Scientific American is aiming to keep its readers thoroughly informed on naval matters. One fact impresses itself very forcibly on the reader's mind, namely, the superiority both in number and excellence of the British vessels over those of the Continental navies. A very important advantage, and one which is somewhat overlooked in the comments on the British navy, is that the rated speed of their vessels is based on natural draught Instead of forced as in all other navies, and as a result a 21-knot vessel of the "Cressy" ' class would be able, under forced draught, to easily overtake a 22-knot vessel of other navies should it come to a chase on the open sea, as she could make over 22 knots under forced draught, a very important advantage not to be lost sight of in speed comparisons. While the British vessels as a rule do not carry as heavy armaments as some others of the same or even less displacement, the additional weight will always be found to be well accounted for in the more powerful boilers and engines required to give them their excellent high speed under natural draught, and in the additional ammunition and stores carried. British ships were they rated at forced draught would be found to be the fastest vessels afloat for their class by a large margin, a very important advantage. A British vessel to-day, in case of hostilities, would be able to accept or refuse battle from hostile ships of equal or superior power for this reason, to say nothing of being able to maintain her most advantageous fighting range should she choose to risk an engagement with a more powerful foe. a comparison of the run from Southampton to New York of our " Columbia" (22-8 knots trial speed) when she averaged 18 '41 knots per hour with the British cruiser " Diadem" (20-5 knots rated speed), from Gibraltar to th Nore, when she averaged 19-27 knots per hour, both runs being made under natural draught, proves the above beyond any question. It is with no little humiliation that all admirers of our navy note the following facts in a speed comparison of our ships with England's. Our Kearsarge" and" Alabama" classes, which are not yet in commission (nor will the last named class be for anothei' year), have the low speed of 16 knots (equal to 14 or 15 in service), and are several knots slower than ships of the same date in foreign navies,. Of course the "Maine" class are a great improvement over the last named of our navy, and the fact that the Senate effectHally blocked the construction of our 13,500-ton battleships and 18,000-ton armored cruisers until next year, while greatly to be deplored, would be fortunate should the Bureau of Construction see fit to take advantage of the fact and increase the speed of the battleships and armored cruisers to 19 and 23 knots respectively ; in which case they would be more up-to-date vessels at the time of their completion. It is likely that Congress would have to be asked for an additional appropriation to cover the increased cost, also the displacement would probably have to be increased ; but according to the exact wording of the naval bill this would be feasible. There is no plausible reason why the United States should not have ships the equal of any afloat or under construction. England has set the speed of her new battleships and armored cruisers of the" Duncan" and " Drake " classes at 19 and 23 knots respectively and tliey will be completed and in commission sometime before our new vessels. It is difficult to understand why, in view of the all-important lessons taught by the late war, the naval authorities do not replace the 1 and 6-pounder guns on the plans of the "Maine"' class, also the proposed new vessels, with 12 and 3-pounders. It was clearly demonstrated that the 1-pounder gun has no place on ariiiorclads where the fighting range is from 1.500 to 3,000 yai'ds. The 12 and 3-pounders are conceded by nearly all naval authorities to be the ideal light rapid-fire guns for both battleships and cruisers. The construction of six unprotected cruisers of about 8.S00 tons trial displacement, of the low speed of 16 knots per hour, which seems to have been decided upon according to the clipping I inclose, if true, seems to be oidy one step removed from the absurd act of Congress, over a year ago, when it inserted a clause in the naval bill providing for the four obsolete monitors now under construction. It has lately been discovered that the six small cruisers can be raised to about 3,200 tons displacement, and still be constructed within the amount appropriated, $1,140,000 each. Why not build six protected cruisers of a little less displacement, and about the speed of the "New Orleans," or six improved " Raleighs," and arm them with two 6-inch and ten 5-inch rapid-firers, or ten rapid-fire 6-inch. It is reasonably certain that vessels of the above type could be built for the amount appropriated, and would not be a comparatively useless waste of the people's money, as will be the case if the present plans are persisted in. It would be fortunate if Secretary Long would withhold his approval of the plans for such extremely slow vessels. An expression of opinion from the editor as to the value of the proposed slow vessels in time of war would be interesting. If they were attached to a squadron they would be of no value, and would keep down its speed to about 14 knots. If they ventured out to sea, and encountered a hostile ship or fleet, they would probably have to surrender, or fight a more powerful antagonist, as they would have no choice of battle on account of very low speed. Of course they could be used for police duty in times of peace, but warships are supposed to be built to fight also, and these vessels seem to be wofully deficient in two of the most important requirements, speed and protection. The proposed large coal supply of the small cruisers is unusually heavy, and is important, but good .speed, protection and ai-mament will win a vastly greater number of battles than a hundred or so tons of coal. It is sincerely to be hoped that the plans as outlined in the inclosed clipping will not be the ones finally adopted, and it does not seem possible that the Bureau of Constmction would commit itself to vessels of the unheard-of speed of 16 knots in this advanced period of w;rship construction. A SUBSCRIBER. Billings, Moiitana, April 26, 1899. [The question of speed in warships is treated at some length in our editorial columns. In comparing the speed of our new battleships and cruisers with that of the new 19-knot battleships and 23-knot cruisers of the British navy, our correspondent overlooks the fact that our ships will be more heav-ily armed. We are willing to sacrifice a knot of speed for a preponderance ill armament. The six new vessels referred to by our correspondent have been designed to meet the new conditions imposed by our possessions in the Pacific and the West Indies. They are intended for service on distant stations, to reach which, it is necessary to make long unbroken trips, or on stations more or less remote where docking facilities are wanting. With a view to this they are to be sheathed and coppered (the weight of which covering reduces the speed by from a quarter to half a knot) and they are to have an unusually large coal supply, sufficient to carry them 8,000 miles without recoaling. The comparatively low speed is in agreement with a growing belief among naval men all over the world, that while higher speed is desirable in the battleships and large cruisers, it is not so essential in the smaller cruisers which do police duty on distant stations.Ed.] Pi,ANS are being made for the projected canal between Berlin and Stettin by which vessels of heavy tonnage will be able to reach Berlin. Mr. Eddys Later Experiments. Mr. W. A. Eddy, of Bayonne, N. J., has been continuing his experiments of sending up a hot air balloon carrying a thermometer, to which we have already referred. The balloon was held captive at a height of 400 feet. The earth temperature when the balloon first ascended was 69 above zero. Five minutes later when it was hauled down the thermometer registered 66. At the second ascension, when the height of 600 feet was reached, there was a difference of 3. The balloon is 12 feet in diameter and exerts a lift of 4 pounds. The thermometer weighs 3 ounces and is arranged to give the readings of the extreme heat and extreme cold. It was impossible to use kites because the wind was so light that they would not remain aloft. The expenses of the experiment are borne by the Hodgkins Fund of the Smithsonian Institution.
