[COPYRIGHTED] U. S. NAVAL INSTITUTE, ANNAPOLIS, MD. DIRECTOR FIRE A CENTURY AGO By LIEUT. COMMANDER W. H. P. BLANDY, U. S. Navy Director fire a century ago? 66 Nothing of the kind," you they loaded the old smooth-bores with black powder and round shot, sighted down the line o' metal, and let her go." And yet a system of fire-control bearing all the ear-marks of present-day director firing was proposed in those same days of smooth-bores and round-shot. In director fire the guns are laid to a common angle of elevation, trained to converge upon a point of known range and bearing, and fired simultaneously from a single station more or less removed from the immediate vicinity of the guns. Such a system is what William Kennish, Carpenter, R. N., tried to achieve in 1829. At that time the British Admiralty was asking the service periodically the following questions: I. "Is there any device to preserve a general level in a ship when heeling or otherwise? If so, describe it." 2. "Is there any method for concentrating the fire of a ship's broadside?" These questions were undoubtedly born of the many actions in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, in which tons of shot were expended with extremely meager results, due both to inaccuracy of the fire and insufficient striking energy of the shot. As an instance of poor shooting, the action between the United States and the Macedonian resulted in only 100 hits in the two hulls, out of about 2500 rounds fired. And a good example of insufficient penetrating power is the Chesapeake-Shannon action, after which, although it was fought throughout "within hail," shot were found sticking in the sides of both ships. Again, in the battle of Navarino, the Albion, "74," fired nearly 7000 rounds without sinking a ship. The Genoa, " 74," in that action lay for 3 hours so close to her antagonist that the whites of the Turks' eyes were visible, and fired away 7000 pounds of powder with shot in proportion, but failed to sink or destroy her opponent. Small wonder then, that the Admiralty sought improved means of fire direction and control, and "a method of concentrating the fire of a ship's broadside"! In attempting to solve the problem of concentration Kennish decided upon five different “fires" on either side as being sufficient to cover all conditions of range and relative bearing likely to arise in an ordinary action. No. I fire converged the guns upon a point only 90 yards from the ship, and abeam of the midship section. No. 2 fire and No. 3 fire were also abeam, at ranges of 500 yards and 800 yards, respectively, the latter being considered the "maximum effective range"! Nos. 4 and 5 each gave a range of 500 yards, and were directed two points forward and abaft the beam, respectively. (See Fig. 1.) The means of training the guns upon these five points consisted of wooden "breast-pieces " pivoted at the gun ports. These were capable of being set in azimuth to any of the five positions necessary to align each gun according to the fire desired. (See Fig. 2.) The breast-piece having been set to the "fire" ordered, the gun carriage was run squarely against it, upon being returned to battery, and the gun was thereby properly trained. The elevation indicator was somewhat similar to that for train, being simply the usual wedge-shaped "quoin" which was moved forward or backward along the "bed" under the gun, thus raising or lowering the breech. Kennish graduated his quoins in degrees, and also marked numbers upon them to indicate the elevation necessary for each "fire." Fig. 3 shows the arrangement of the gun, bed, and quoin, and also a form of "gunner's quadrant" in the muzzle of the gun, used in graduating the quoin. In addition to this means of showing the elevation, each gun was fitted with a simple open sight, graduated for the different "fires," to be used when heavy rolling required each gun captain to choose his own instant for firing. By far the most interesting part of the system, in its relation to modern gunnery, is the instrument which Kennish invented for |