• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Naval Historical Society of Australia

Preserving Australia's Naval History

  • Events
  • Account
  • Members Area
  • Volunteer
  • Donate
  • Contact us
  • Show Search
  • 0 items
Hide Search
Menu
  • Home
  • Research
    • Where to start
      • Research – We can help!
      • Self help
      • Naval Service Records
      • Library
      • Related Maritime websites
    • Resources
      • Articles
      • Videos
      • On This Day
      • Podcasts
      • Australian Military Ship Losses
      • RAN events on a  Google Earth Map
      • RAN Vessels – Where are they now?
      • Related Maritime websites
    • Other
      • Newsletters: Call The Hands
      • Occasional Papers and Historical Booklets
      • Books
      • HMAS Shropshire
      • Book reviews
    • Close
  • Naval Heritage Sites
    • World Heritage Listings
      • Cockatoo Island
    • National Heritage Listings
      • HMAS Sydney II and the HSK Kormoran Shipwreck Sites
      • HMVS Cerberus
    • Commonwealth Heritage Listings
      • Garden Island NSW
      • HMAS Watson
      • HMAS Penguin
      • Spectacle Island Explosives Complex NSW
      • Chowder Bay Naval Facilities
      • Beecroft Peninsula NSW
      • Admiralty House, Garden and Fortifications
      • HMAS Cerberus
      • Naval Offices QLD
      • Garden Island WA
      • Royal Australian Naval College ACT
      • Royal Australian Naval Transmitting Station ACT
    • NSW Heritage Listings
      • HMAS Rushcutter
    • Close
  • Naval Art
  • Tours & Cruises
    • Navy in Sydney Harbour Cruise, East
    • Navy in Sydney Harbour Cruise, West
    • Anniversary Cruise: Sydney under Japanese Attack
    • Tour Bookings
    • Close
  • About us
    • About Us
      • What we do
      • Our People
      • Office Bearers
      • Become a volunteer
      • Our Goals and Strategy
    • Organisation
      • Victoria Chapter
      • WA Chapter
      • ACT Chapter
    • Close
  • Membership
  • Shop
  • Become a volunteer
  • Donate
You are here: Home / Article topics / Publications / Naval Historical Review / Naval Hardware – Breech Loaders (Part1)

Naval Hardware – Breech Loaders (Part1)

A.N. Other · Jun 28, 1981 · Print This Page

Author
A.N. Other and NHSA Webmaster
Subjects
None noted
Tags
None noted.
RAN Ships
None noted.
Publication
June 1981 edition of the Naval Historical Review (all rights reserved)

WHEN NELSON FOUGHT THE BATTLE OF TRAFALGAR his ships, and those of the enemy, used guns that differed very little from those used by Drake to beat the Spanish Armada almost three hundred years before. Possibly the most important improvement that had appeared was the use of a lock to fire the charge, but to all intents and purposes the gun was still the old smooth bore muzzle loader firing round shot. Various types of projectiles were in use for specific purposes, such as chain shot and bar shot to smash rigging, and grapeshot to wipe out the guns crews of the enemy. The main obstacle was the lack of range with the smooth bore, and one way out was to fire an elongated shell. Using this type of projectile a shell weight of at least double could be realised. But the smooth bore didn’t go well with the elongated shell, accuracy fell off very quickly as the shell rolled end over end through the air. The rifled barrel solved this problem.

The problem of loading the long and heavy shell had to be overcome. On its simple truck carriage, the muzzle loading gun had to be run back inside the ship to be loaded, a lot of space was therefore required in front of the muzzle, and this of course was very difficult to obtain in a warship.

One way to tackle this problem was to load the gun through the breech, a system that had a lot to its credit. With this system there was no need to expose the loading numbers to enemy fire, as all the loading operations would be carried out at the rear, and for guns in exposed positions it would be a simple matter to provide a shield.

As to who actually invented the breech loading system, we now know it is open to debate as there are two distinct methods to follow up. One of the most common was the interrupted screw, in which a screwed plug was locked into the rear of the barrel. Sections of the screw threads were removed from both the breech plug and the barrel. It was then a simple matter to push the plug in and turn it, the threaded sections locking the two parts together.

The other method was to use a flat wedge to close the breech, a system that is in use today, although far removed from the original idea.

Development of the breech loading system ran along different lines throughout Europe, the French favouring the screw breech block, whilst the British muddled on with the wedge.

Mr. William Armstrong, later Sir W.G. Armstrong, brought out his breech loading gun and offered it for trials. First indications were that here was a truly reliable system. Results were to prove otherwise.

The screw was made hollow so that the shell and charge could be rammed home from the rear. The method of loading was simple. The screw was wound back, the vent was lifted out of the gun, the projectile and charge were then introduced through the screw. The vent was then replaced and the screw tightened up. This was where the main problems arose. To seal the escape of gases at the rear of the barrel, a copper ring was fitted into the vent piece, and the tension of the screw was supposed to effect a seal. Practice was to show that a gun could be fired with the screw not tight enough, and many nasty accidents occurred.

One of the main objections to the new gun was that it was in most cases less powerful than the old muzzle loaders, but with dogged British persistence the Board of Ordnance carried on, and many thousands of the new guns were produced, until finally they admitted to defeat. It was a simple matter of buying before trying.

The objections to this system are quite obvious when the drawings are examined. To fire a charge, a flame had to be transported down a right angled vent, drilled in this manner for two main reasons. The first one was that it was an easy matter to drill the two holes, the second and main reason being that it would have been virtually impossible to drill an angled hole that would strike the charge at the base, without weakening the vent piece itself.

Pages: Page 1 Page 2

Naval Historical Review

Primary Sidebar

SUBSCRIBE

Sign up for our monthly e-newsletter.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Categories

Latest Podcasts

  • The Fall of Singapore
  • HMAS Armidale
  • Napoleon, the Royal Navy and Me
  • The Case of the Unknown Sailor
  • Night of the midget subs — Sydney under attack

Links to other podcasts

Australian Naval History Podcasts
This podcast series examines Australia’s Naval history, featuring a variety of naval history experts from the Naval Studies Group and elsewhere.
Produced by the Naval Studies Group in conjunction with the Submarine Institute of Australia, the Australian Naval Institute, Naval Historical Society and the RAN Seapower Centre

Life on the Line Podcasts
Life on the Line tracks down Australian war veterans and records their stories.
These recordings can be accessed through Apple iTunes or for Android users, Stitcher.

Video Links

  • Australian War Memorial YouTube channel
  • Royal Australian Navy YouTube Channel
  • Research – We can help!
  • Naval Heritage Sites
  • Explore Naval Art
  • Dockyard Heritage Tour
  • About us
  • Shop
  • Events
  • Members Area
  • Volunteer
  • Donate
  • Contact us

Follow us

  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • Members Area
  • Privacy Policy

Naval Historical Society of Australia Inc. Copyright © 2025